The Liberals have been pressing for the brief on the basis of which he said there was authority for war.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
When they are preparing for war, those who rule by force speak most copiously about peace until they have completed the mobilization process.
For a war to be just three conditions are necessary - public authority, just cause, right motive.
Liberals need to take the advice they routinely give to conservatives: that there are consequences to their divisive rhetoric, and that in their attempts to score political points, they are also inciting violence.
War is something Arafat sends others to do for him. That is, the poor souls who believe in him. This pompous incompetent caused the failure of the Camp David negotiations, Clinton's mediation.
All those who seek to destroy the liberties of a democratic nation ought to know that war is the surest and shortest means to accomplish it.
No man has the right to use the great powers of the Presidency to lead the people, indirectly, into war.
We advised them to do what they think proper against the war.
The Constitution's pretty clear. The Federalist papers are pretty clear... They very specifically delegated the power to declare war to Congress. They wanted this to be a congressional decision; they did not want war to be engaged in by the executive without approval of Congress.
A liberal is a man too broadminded to take his own side in a quarrel.
What is not conservative about saying, 'Don't go to war unless we go to war properly with a full declaration of war and no other way?'