As an outsider to the political process, it has been absolutely hilarious watching a White House full of children of the 1960′s retroactively justifying Nixon’s Christmas bombings of Cambodia. It’s not a war, they claim, as long as our soldiers are safe and we are mostly just killing citizens of other nations from the air. Of course, by this definition, the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was not an act of war.Yamamoto was just enforcing a No-Fly Zone over Honolulu.
.
12 comments:
"Yamamoto was just enforcing a No-Fly Zone over Honolulu."
Sigh. Historical anachronism. flying was permitted, it was the "The no-sailing zone in Pearl Harbour." that had him bent out of shape.
Hippies with Guns in their Hands. What's next, a sequel to Mao's Great Leap Forward?
I'm struck by the similarities in the retirements of Osama and Yamamoto. There's a lesson in there somewhere.
Yamamoto: BRB someone's on my 6
Yeah, I know all about those "this really isn'at a war" idioms.
Experienced several of them during my military service.
And trust me, these scars ain't from "training exercises."
Counting the days until this asswipe is gone from office.
--AOA
The historians can't seem to settle whether to call this one "The Third Space War" (or the "Fourth"), or whether "The First Interstellar War" fits it better. We just call it "The Bug War" if we call it anything, which we usually don't and in any case the historians date the beginning of "war" after the time I joined my first outfit and ship. Everything up to then and still later were "incidents," "patrols," or "police actions." However, you are just as dead if you buy the farm in an "incident" as you are if you buy it in a declared war." -RAH
Anon 2:38,
Those tanks in Benghazi were about to take off! We had to shoot them down because of the No-Fly Zone!
Can't take chances with flying tanks. Srsly.
You know, given the vitriolic nature of some of the past comment threads at this blog, I would surely have thought the "No-Fly Zone over Honolulu" thing would have sparked off the blogosphere equivalent of Global Thermonuclear War.
Guess no one Would Like To Play A Game. :)
tweaker
Here's a demotivational poster for you: http://diy2.despair.com/spage/74321757.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXwDkPu0IpU&feature=player_embedded
Friend sent me this with the caption, "The vilest video since Two Girls, One Cup."
Best comment I've seen on the Libya fiasco.
It's only fair to point out that "Act of War" by the traditions and laws of war and international relations is not the same thing as "Declaring War" for purposes of Article I, Section 8.
By which I mean that the Administration hasn't tried to say that there isn't a State of War, or that blowing the crap out of Libyan armed forces is not an Act of War - just that it doesn't count for this one specific purpose.
I'm not convinced by that argument, to say the least, but it is a different one from "blowing the crap out of stuff is not an act of war".
They're making a legal argument about a legal document,and thus the parsing should be in legal terms - and "act of war" vs. "declare war" vis-a-vis Art I., Sec. 8 is meaningful.
Post a Comment