Kokesh for Congress?

| May 2, 2009

Any interested Santa Fe reporter can contact me for background – if you’re looking for the real story, I’m willing to give real interviews. I know what Kokesh has been up to for the last two years better than he knows it;
Kokesh for Congress

Thanks to 1stCavRVN11B for ruining my weekend.

Category: Politics

56 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
FOMSG

Ms. Clark, I could care less about Adam’s side of the story, his actions speak for themselves. I think the most important thing about the Iraq War is Victory. My personal pain and how I deal with it is important to me and those close to me. It is not a National issue. And thank God I have my buddies I served with to help me. What I DON’T need is a bunch of self-involved jackasses purporting to speak for me, slandering the good work done by the outstanding Soldiers with whom I served. Some of whom aren’t around to give their opinion. I am familiar with Locke’s idea, but haven’t read the book. I rather tend towards Hobbesian pessimism. But I don’t completely ascribe to his philosophy either. Anarchism is a broad subject indeed. I wrote the definitions off the top of my head. One can quibble, but I stand by my characterization. Could care less about breastfeeding photos. Lots of things are healthy, but not everything is for public consumption. I never will understand the need some people have for EVERYONE TO APPLAUD every mundane aspect of their lives. Which is why I don’t do the facebook thing. I don’t think myself so utterly fascinating as to need a website dedicated to informing the masses of my every thought, feeling or action. But I would like to read your paper. As for the illegality of the war. Please, please, PLEASE need MAKE THE F’ING ARGUEMENT ALREADY. Christ, I don’t agree with you but I could come up with two arguments that would at least need refutation. 1) Congress didn’t explicitly “Declare War” Refutation: If the phrase “Declare War” has any meaning at all surely the authorization of military force conveys its essence. 2) International Law forbids it. Refutation: Although treaties are the “Law of the Land”, the Constitution does not allow any branch or branches of the Government to cede the Nation’s Sovereignty. Nor can they delegate the powers granted to some supra-national authority. ONLY Congress can declare war. The United States is a member not a subject… Read more »

Debbie Clark

Initiating and waging a war of aggression is a violation of the Nuremberg Principles. And yes, Congress did not declare war as is required by the US Constitution. Of course, none of the wars waged in the past 50 years have been.

My opinion on the United Nations is that the US should withdraw from it and kick them out of our country. My opinion on the International Criminal Court is actually the same as George Bush’s. I think that war criminals should be investigated and prosecuted by the US government, not some international body.

I think that in a healthy society, mothers would freely nurse their children wherever they are, not hide in their homes to do it while there is widespread social acceptance for bottles made of toxic plastic containing fake milk to be publicly stuck into the mouths of babies.

Debbie Clark

FOMSG,

My paper is extremely long. If you don’t want to join Facebook but want to read it, I guess I could post it on my blog, though I’d rather not. I have a website I could upload it to, but I haven’t maintained it in a long time and really don’t want to mess with it as I don’t even have the software I need for it on my current computer. How ’bout if you just start a Facebook page to at least use for access to things like this? It only takes a minute to start one.

FOMSG

Ms. Clark,

Thanks for answering. I do appreciate it. I respect your honoraable intentions.

The 2003 invasion was not an act aggression initiated by the US. It was a legitimate response the continued non-compliance by Iraq with the terms of the ceasefire it agreed to as a result of IRAQ’S AGGRESSION against Kuwait in August 1990.

So much for the Nuremburg principles argument.

As for Congress. It explicitly and specifically authorized the use of military force against Iraq. It did not use the words “Declare War.” No one directly involved with the resolution doubted the Constitutionality of it, nor has it been challenged before the Supreme Court. Nor will it.

If it were, I have no doubt it would be upheld, probably unanimously. I imagine the majority opinion would argue that the commonly accepted meaning of the phrase “Declare War” at the time the Constitution was written was the explicit authorization for the use of military force.

The counter argument that Congress must use the words “Declare War” has no more intellectual weight than a four-year olds argument that “You said I could have a snack, this isn’t a snack it’s a cookie!”

The morality, efficacy or utility of the Iraq War is debatable. Its legality isn’t.

The Iraq War is legal.

And perhaps a reasonable person would think twice before tossing around accusations of illegality if they wished to be taken seriously.

I think that in a healthy society, people would not intentionally subject random strangers to actions designed to make them uncomfortable in order to make some dopey, condescending point about the “beauty” of breastfeeding.

I’m not starting a facebook account. Do you have a way for me to contact you at your blog? I could send you an email and you could send it to me?

How do I get to your blog?

Debbie Clark

Uh…you get to my blog by clicking on my name on my post to this blog. Or you can just email me at dclark@antiwar.com and I’ll send it to you as an attachment.

FOMSG

Thanks, still a little techno illiterate