Has the US EVER declared war on an INDIVIDUAL??

[SoCalDem]

The "commission" seems to be accusing Clinton of not declaring war, yet Bin Laden was not a head of state ANYWHERE.. They slyly mentioned Milosevic, yet NO ONE corrected them and said that HE was president of a NATION..

Bin Laden was/is a character, very much like a James Bond villain ..He is a very rich, very charismatic religious figure.. He is NOT a head of State..

Had Clinton gone to congress or even the public and asked to declare war on a PERSON, he would have been ridiculed and hooted off the stage..

This is ONE reason why a HUGE, bloated military such as ours, is NOT the way to fight wars anymore..

[laughing_dog]

1. But he's evil!

He's Blofeld for them, SoCal. They desperately need some guy hiding in a hollowed-out volcano with death rays. They've already got all the money and its power...now they want fear and the power IT brings.

[SoCalDem]

2. I'm not a Bond fan, so I don't know Blofield,

but the old series Man from U.N.C.L.E. came to mind too.. They were always after the evil villains.. Maybe Bin Laden modeled himself after these characters..

Call Ilya Kuryakin and james.. right away.. Maybe they would have better luck. Get Batman on the phone too :)

[nadinbrzezinski]

3. Under International Law war can only

be declared among sovereign and recognized states... last time I checked Bin Ladin IS NOT a state... someobdy correct me on this.

Now under religious law, an individual can declare war on a state or declare an individual out of the pale (this goes for any tradition) and since Bin Ladin sees himself as a mixture of a prophet and a mullah, he could and did declare war against us... (and by that he meant the US first and the West second)

Now the comision is playing to a point games with words, because ALL of the members have served in capacities where this SHOULD BE Common Knowledge.. but I suspect there is some effort by some in the Commision to pass the buck to Clinton no matter what... aka a political white wash.

[SoCalDem]

4. Yep.. they love their word games..

I wish someone would bring this up..

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. We can, if enogh of us send

leters to teh paper of record they will realize we ain't that stupid, damn it!

[radwriter0555]

5. Noriega.

?

[nadinbrzezinski]

7. That was a police action

and while Bush 41 may feel he declared war on Noriega.. LEGALLY he acted under the War Powers Act. Aka he had 90 days before having to beg Congress for ANY authorization... notice how much the Buhies like to play with soldiers and not ask Congress if they can?

Btw why do yuo think Junior declared Major Combat Operations over? The authorization for use of force in October was NOT a declaration of war... and he was getting close to the 90 days, and the need for full intervention by the Hill. (that includes supervision which they have been fighitng ever since because operations are in a gray area now... we are not technically at war... but don't tell that to the grunts on the ground.)

[SoCalDem]

8. AND.. Noriega was PRESIDENT

of a COUNTRY..

[Bandit]

9. Why oh why didn't Clinton call Batman out of his bat cave?

Maybe they should impeach him again because Batman was not called in.

[Ysabel]

11. they are...

impeaching him again - or trying to anyway - i think...

[rinsd]

10. Before 9/11....

"Had Clinton gone to congress or even the public and asked to declare war on a PERSON, he would have been ridiculed and hooted off the stage.."

Certainly. I think that's the way Albright put it. There wasn;t support for a major military action against terrorism

And to answer your question...The Barbary Pirates during Jefferson's term.

[SoCalDem]

13. I did remember the pirates, I neglected to say "modern times"

you historical stickler, you :P

[Ysabel]

12. yes...

er - i mean - no - but yes - the same question crossed my mind...