A word misunderstood by modern Americans who stopped studying Latin too long ago.

 

Could be a person who misunderstands the real world and dont live by lies and coverups and knows when to stop spending money.

Could be a person who misunderstands the real world and dont live by lies and coverups and knows when to stop spending money.

 

Then there aren't many non-liberals in our government in either party.

1964: Gulf of Tonkin Resolution - Congress voted. Passed based on (intentionally) misleading information about attacks on American vessels. Provided power to conduct Vietnam War until ended. Supposed threat to US assets in region.

1965: Invasion of Dominican Republic - No Congressional approval. Triggered by coup that overthrew elected government. Occupied country until 1966. Civil war.

1983: Grenada - no approval by Congress. Invasion based on potential (not proven) threat to US citizen medical students. Civil war.

1991: Gulf War Resolution - Approved by Congress in support of UN Resolution. Compared to Gulf of Tonkin resolution in terms of giving uncapped power to President. Cross border invasion.

2003: Iraq resolution - Approved by Joint Resolution of Congress. Supported UN resolution. Cited lack of cooperation by Hussein as main reason. No direct threat to US or cross border action.

2011: US actively helps overthrow Gaddafi with military force. No Congressional approval. No UN resolution. Civil war.

2013: US supplies weapons to forces fighting Syrian President Assad. Claims of chemical weapon use trigger more direct threat. Civil war.

 

It appears that the time Congress is ignored the most when Presidents want to get involved in 'civil wars'. When the issue is more direct aggression at US (Gulf of Tonkin) or cross-border (Gulf War) there is more support sought and given. Gulf War II seemed to be triggered by the fact that some powerful countries in the region (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and (get this) Turkey) wanted Hussein gone. Also the fact that Hussein threatened H. with a death threat did not help him.

 

Turkey seems to the main country calling for Assad's ouster. They seem to have pull and have been a big backer of Obama. Presidents usually have ways to help friends. In this case - the 'Chemical weapon line' was drawn months ago to set up a trigger. And lo and behold. The line was crossed. Not to unlike the Gulf of Tonkin methodology. We invoked a response from the North Vietnamese by penetrating deep into their waters with spy vessels. When they reacted we used as an excuse to go to war. Sadams WMDs being hidden provided similar trigger. The formula seems to re-usable.

 

In most cases the CIA lead the way. Benghazi (with 40 CIA staff at the annex) was almost certainly a base for moving weapons to the Syrian opposition - through Turkey. Its not really a secret at this point. But the Russians will not give up on Assad. He is their best ally in the region. So this has become somewhat of a proxy war.

 

You could actually add to that our involvement in South America in 50's, and the Chilean coup in the early 70's. Most see our involvement in those actions as well.

We have backed many different groups since the end of WWII hoping they would help us defeat the threat of Soviet communism.

Some of them have come back to bite us in the butt after giving them arms. But this is the first time we have armed someone after being bit first.

We have backed many different groups since the end of WWII hoping they would help us defeat the threat of Soviet communism.

Some of them have come back to bite us in the butt after giving them arms. But this is the first time we have armed someone after being bit first.

 

Except that one time we sold arms to Iran after they took a bunch of hostages. Or does that not count because Reagan was involved??

We have backed many different groups since the end of WWII hoping they would help us defeat the threat of Soviet communism.

Some of them have come back to bite us in the butt after giving them arms. But this is the first time we have armed someone after being bit first.

 

We supported the Shah in Iran. And we trained his 'security' people to be nasty to control the otherwise uncontrollable Islamic radicals. Why? Because he allowed us put up listening post along the border with the Soviet Union. We get in bed with some bad characters at times.

 

When the Shah fell we had to get people out of those posts quickly - and quietly.