Why can't Congress stop this they never declared war on Iraq?

Question

The war powers act and the constitution even allow the Congress the power to disband the military!
Bush is not the decider!
Congress has the power to demand 90 day appraisals and can decide to bring our troops out of a conflict!

Answer 1

They care more about the political fallout they may face in the future than they care about ending the war now. Bush wants Dems to end the war so Republicans can blame them for loss in Iraq. If niether party had to worry about the political fallout this war would have ended as soon as they stopped handing us candy and flowers in the streets of Baghdad.

Answer 2

Because Democrats are trying to smear Republicans as badly as they can. They want the War to fail and they want George W. to take the fall. Why do you think they want to make deals with Iran? Why do they keep feeding news media information to paint the bleakest picture possible? Why do they oppose George W.'s surge? It's pretty evident what they're doing, but it's sad that so many people are ignorant of their actions. Anyone who claims Pelosi is anything but evil is very confused.

They're scared and on a power trip, unfortunately. We'll have 8 years of a Republican president as of the end of '08. Typically we have 12 year cycle swings - so the next president with either be Democrat, or a very moderate Republican. I'm not that old, but I'm getting tired of the politics in politics :-D. It just makes me sad how the immoral people always seem to get ahead and try to drag down the good people.

To answer your question, Congress has been able to stop the war from day 1. But then they would be the fault for future war, terrorist attacks on US, and Iran taking over the powerless Iraq. They don't want that. They want Iraq to get to a point where they can rule themselves well, but in a situation where it looks bad for the US, so they are the eventual heroes for "bringing us home" against the wishes of the evil Bush. Expect candidates to be the most visceral people for sneaky, nasty ways to hide information and attack Bush.

Answer 3

Not going to share my own opinion on the conflict but I see no reason they couldn't just refuse to pay, hence forcing the troops home. But believe me, if there is anything AT ALL to the truth that Iran is behind terrorism or joins in battle or commits a terrorist act and if there is proof positive of this (ask for other countries to help monitor this by all means) then all those who voted for the cut-off of money will not stand a chance of getting re-elected; and expect the firming of public opinion against the war to lose a great deal of momentum.

Answer 4

Congress can stop the war but they don't want to. There are to many people making money off this war. When is Congress going to stop the War on Poverty or the War on Drugs?

Answer 5

There was war IN Iraq, not on Iraq, for one thing. Since then we've been aiding Iraqis with their new democracy, and new democracies aren't always easy. Ours sure wasn't. And it's tough for them, after decades of Saddam's ba'ath bullies.

The other point is that the President is Commander in Chief. There will be a new one in a couple of years and I expect that you'll want our President and the office represented respected then as now.

Answer 6

LOL...well, the hot and heavies are paying quite a lot of attention to the anti-burning American Flag legislation, and the anti-gay bashing legislation, the 'hate crimes' legislation so Americans can be punished for thought, word or deed against anything they think you may be thinking about hating or saying no no's about gays, blacks, Arabs, Muslims...so on, and so on.

I really think this Senate sucks at their priorities. They promised much, but are only finding ways to make Americans suffer for Pelosi's hate of GWB. This has also been written about. This country is beginning to serve up a smell of rotten tomatoes and I think it's the new congress.

Yes, they have been telling people in Washington that Saddam had WMD's and they won't admit it. But GWB also told them he still had to go to fight terrorists. He made the statement "you're either with the terrorists, or you're against them." or something to that affect. Yes, Iraq is a breeding ground for terrorists, but so is the US and I have a video for you to see.

It's an interview by CN8 in New Jersey, on a morning talk show. They interviewed 3 former and now tolerant terrorists and they have information that will shock the pants off of you.

If you feel it is important for others to see, then please feel free to forward it to the people of your choosing. It's about 20 minutes and you're gonna get one heck of an education, just as I did.

http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=LK07B70&f=PW07B04&t=e

Answer 7

Ahem. It is not necessary for Congress to formally Declare War; only that the Congress indicate that there are problems with a foreign state/organization.

Answer 8

Sorry little Missy. You're wrong. Once congress gave him the power to act (and they did) he is the decider. Yes he is.

Now go do the dishes like a good little girl and let the men talk.

Answer 9

This incredibly old old floor..... using stress decision handed by ability of Congress acts as a assertion. something is semantics... In international the place issues can ensue with a button push, the assumption is somewhat dated. whether there became right into a paper that mentioned, assertion? human beings would nevertheless be whining....

Answer 10

You seem to miss the whole point of being over there to fight. Have you really thought about the consequences of us leaving are? To do that complies with Bin Laudin's war plan. Thank God that President Bush is the decider!