patrick.net

bob2356 says

Oh wait, that’s right Hussein was an evil dictator. Not in the top 10 but one of the club...

We attacked Iraq because that's where President Cheney wanted to finish the job that Senior started. We attacked because it was convenient. Timeline:

March 19, 2003 - Bush/Cheney launch invasion of Iraq

March 30, 2003 - "We know where [the weapons of mass destruction] are. They’re in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat." Rumsfeld [ABC This Week, 3/30/03]

May 1, 2003 - Mission Accomplished fiasco ("[M]y fellow Americans: Major combat operations in Iraq have ended). [Bush, 5/1/03]

May 29, 2003 - "We found the weapons of mass destruction. [Bush, 5/29/03]"
July 11, 2003 - "All that I can tell you is that if there were doubts about the underlying intelligence in the NIE, those doubts were not communicated to the President. [Condoleeza Rice, WH Gaggle, 7/11/03]"

July 14, 2003 - I think the intelligence I get is darn good intelligence. And the speeches I have given were backed by good intelligence. [Bush, 7/14/03]
NOVEMBER 6, 2003: Bush signs $87 billion supplemental spending bill into law [Bush, 11/6/03]

January 28, 2004 - No WMD found. "It turns out that we were all wrong, probably in my judgment, and that is most disturbing. [Kay, 1/28/04]"

March 24, 2004 - "Those weapons of mass destruction have got to be somewhere" [Bush, 3/24/04] (he was joking, to be fair)

October 7, 2004 - CIA report: Saddam Hussein did not possess stockpiles of illicit weapons at the time of the U.S. invasion in March 2003 and had not begun any program to produce them, a CIA report concludes. [CNN, 10/7/04]

Read it yourself: http://thinkprogress.org/report/iraq-timeline/

Oops, might I add that WMD were never recovered because, as was stated over & over, we had bad intel? Oops. We've spent billions overthrowing a dictator that had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks. Unfortunately, we haven't gotten out - but a great read is "The Imperial Life in the Emerald City."

dang ... I forgot to take off my prime-rib shorts before jumping in the dog pen!! lol
@ellie,
I have a gut feeling, not much more. lol

@bob,
which branch should we hit first? And what will be a completed mission?

anyways, Happy Father's Day

Bap33 says

dang … I forgot to take off my prime-rib shorts before jumping in the dog pen!! lol

That's a new one to me, and I shall quote you. ;)

Troy says

He won’t even explain why it doesn’t apply

They do, actually. Read your damn nyt article immediately above. They say that no Americans are being put in harm’s way, now that NATO is taking the lead and our efforts are RPV controlling and logistics.

You mean this bit:

The theory Mr. Obama embraced holds that American forces have not been in “hostilities” as envisioned by the War Powers Resolution at least since early April, when NATO took over the responsibility for the no-fly zone and the United States shifted to a supporting role providing refueling assistance and surveillance — although remotely piloted American drones are still periodically firing missiles.

The US has been harping on "NATO" but it's pretty obvious what nationality the bulk of "NATO forces" are. There was a hilarious exchange a few weeks back when a Pentagon shill who just mouthed the "Mostly just Support" line had to admit to a reporter (based on the very charts and graphs behind him) that the "NATO forces" assigned to the Libyan Theatre were mostly American. I can't find it, but I did find this:

The revelation came as Pentagon officials laid out U.S. participation in the Libya conflict over the past 10 days, including that Americans have flown 35 percent of all air missions.

Those missions, they said, include bombing attacks against Libyan surface-to-air missile launchers, as well as surveillance and refueling operations. It was the first time the Pentagon acknowledged that airstrikes continued after the U.S. handed over control of the Libya mission to NATO on April 4.

According to Pentagon officials, eleven U.S. fighter jets were assigned to NATO to look for and take out the air defense systems.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/13/libya--us-airstrikes-nato_n_848817.html

Now granted, the President said "Early April", and in lawyer speak April 13th can be construed as "Early April", however, let's review what the War Powers Resolutions states.

The War Powers Resolution says "Hostilities". The word "Servicemen" or the phrase "Placing Servicemen at risk" or any similar language, does not appear anywhere in the Resolution.

Hostilities don't require the commitment of land forces. Violating another country's airspace with military aircraft, not to mention actually launching missiles and bombs from them, is certainly an act of overt warfare and thus hostilities. Drone attacks launching explosive devices is hostilities, even if they are unmanned. Cruise Missile attacks are also hostilities. If one country drops cruise missiles on another, I doubt the recipient wouldn't hesitate to characterize the missile attacks as "Hostilities".