Why are there no more Declarations of War>?
Is it because we really aren't under any threat?
Because WW2 was the last (and only) true Good vs Evil battle. The world is so connected and careful now, something like WW2 will never happen again. Instead we'll be subjected to military, police actions and occupations that are basically war, but founded on retarded ideas used to benefit an elite few.
>>69708511
U.S has not been in a threat ever since 1861.U.S interests, though? Possibly.
>>69708511
What's the point of declaring war against animals, anon? You just put them down.
the authorization of military force by Bush was specifically for those responsible for 9/11, so how is force authorized against ISIS?
>>69708698
>implying the Spanish weren't a threat in 1898
The Spanish American war was entirely justified you stupid goy.
>>69708511
The reason nobody goes to war with America is because it's like going to war with the special needs kid of the world.
You have the highest military budget in the world by a landslide, consistently been fighting throughout your existence, and yet have never won a war without someone else's help, nor have you even come close to winning a war since WWII (despite constantly fighting someone ever since).
Everyone feels bad for America so we just play along that you're a 'super-power' of the world.
Maybe one day America will be stop being a third world country, and actually make something of itself, but I doubt it.
>>69708511
Because the Constitution has been eroded tremendously. We are now living in a post-Constitutional United States.
>>69708650
> will never happen again
It could happen again, it would just be far more devastating than the last
>>69708511
A combination of unpopular politics and real world alliances and treaties. If your not technically "at war", than you skirt around all the global political and legal nonsense.
>>69708511
Because there hasn't been a justified need to declare war as a nation. Police Actions and Conflicts are justified through the Commander-in-Chief clause, no real need for DoW for those.
>>69708698
>S has not been in a threat ever since 1861.U.S interests, though? Possibly
>What is Pearl Harbor
Wouldn't expect you to not side with the slopes though, you little slant eye fuck.
>>69709138
>nor have you even come close to winning a war since WWII
>Grenada
>Panama
>Operation: Iraqi Freedom
>Operation: Desert Storm
>mfw Britbongs couldn't even stop the Argentines without help from the U.S. and they still talk shit
>>69709138
>>69710653
The US did nothing for us in the Falklands. Tossers.
>>69710900
>The US did nothing for us in the Falklands
Just gave you satellite and military intelligence on top of basing capabilities that you otherwise wouldn't have had any access to. But yeah, we did nothing.
>>69708511
Because nationalism is not anything anymore. If you are this explicit about going to war, you better have a good reason or you will be fucked in the next election.
>>69711005
a thing*
>>69709138
You lost to us twice, Bongbro. Someday you'll find peace with that fact.
>>69710991
Fucking Norway were more help in the Falklands than the US. Chile was also a good ally.
The US did very little, when they should have done more. You guys let us down in Suez badly, and didn't repay us with support in the Falklands.
>>69708511
Because declaring war leads to obligations under the Geneva convention, especially when dealing with the co-beligerant's captured prisoners.
Not declaring war means they are not prisoners of war but illegal combatants, spies and sabboteurs who can be summarily executed etc.
Makes life easier, especially when fighting someone who does not adhere to the rules of war.
>>69711087
No, we lost to the French and other major powers in North America. Do Americans really think they won independence, and we're not given independence by France?
>>69711479
>The US did very little
Yeah, we just told you where the Argentines were every second of every day for most of the "war." You need some perspective.
>You guys let us down in Suez badly
You fucked up in the Suez. We told you don't do it. You did it anyways, so we ratcheted down.
>and didn't repay us with support in the Falklands
Lol keep shucking and jiving reality.
>>69711577
Doesn't matter if the French blockade BTFO you on the ocean. We BTFO you on land where it counted.
Doesn't a declaration of war have to go through congress, so it's much easier to circumvent it?
>>69711519
>rules
>war
???
>>69711632
Yeah, you gave us a few missiles and loaned a couple of ships to us. The US is truly our greatest ally! Chile and France provided more for us, and Norway gave us all the intelligence we needed.
Oh, come on. We were so goddamn close to achieving our military objective in Suez. But the US, being the slimeball superpower it is refused to give us moral support. Militarily we were on the cusp of victory. Israel would get the Sinai, we'd retain the Canal and remain a superpower, and France would gain some lost prestige. You bowed to Soviet pressure as much as we did.
>>69712283
>You bowed to Soviet pressure as much as we did
>siding with the goal we stated before the conflict started is bowing to Soviet pressure
wew lad. We're done here since you're going to continuously be a counter-factual faggot.
>>69712418
>It's okay that we directly contributed to the downfall of the west because of our moralism, because at least that's what we said we wanted.
>>69712418
Sure, before the crisis you warned against it, but once your ally commits you fucking stand behind them, especially during the Cold War. The US even talks about "blowing the hell" out of us in Egypt. What a "special relationship".
And especially against that bastard Nasser. You let the UK, France and Israel down.
>>69708511
Multiple reasons.
1. The presence of treaties and international law. In 1898, there were 3 treaties that dictated how wars should be done. Today, there are over 35. Almost every country on earth has consented to abide by certain terms and conditions while in a formal "war". For example, the U.S. derives benefit from being able to treat its enemies as "terrorists" rather than "soldiers" or "prisoners of war". Nearly every country on earth has disavowed "war" as a means to solve disputes, so it is in the interest of nearly every country on earth to never engage in an armed conflict as a "war".
2. The reality of law in the United States is that all Congress needs to do to authorize armed conflicts is to offer a head nod ("AUMF") and keep the military funded in its budgets. Things follow the path of least resistance. Why make a lot of noise about something as timelessly unpopular as armed conflicts?
3. Formal declarations of war were never that popular in the first place. Between 1800 and 1950, less than 50%of all armed conflicts were done under a formal declaration of war.
>>69712591
>>69712605
>Your friend says he's going to jump off a bridge
>You tell your friend not to do that
>Friend jumps off the bridge anyways and gets pissed that you don't drown yourself along with him
Yeah, nah. You're a bunch of cunts.
Also
>Perfidious Albion blasting anyone for telling allies to fuck off
>>69712605
>not realizing we have been doing everything possible to engineer your destruction since the 1760s
>>69712793
Trying to retain our status as an imperial superpower is hardly jumping off a bridge. Our pulling out of Suez led directly to the end of the UKs superpower status, gave the left wind in their sails, led to the decline of the British Empire, and had lasting effects on Franco-American relations,
Perfidious Albion is just a meme mate. Unfortunately De Gaulle believed it, "muh Mers-El-Kebir".
>>69713087
>and had lasting effects on Franco-American relations,
Fuck the French. They didn't pay their war debts before the Suez Crisis anyways. Why the fuck we let them back into NATO after the shit they've pulled against us over the last 100 years I have no fucking clue. Fuck them and fuck you.
>Perfidious Albion is just a meme mate
Tell that to literally any of your allies over the last 1000 years.
>>69712976
Having the largest empire of all time and being the lone superpower for a century is hardly engineering our destruction.
However, entering WW1 was the biggest mistake we've ever made. Fucking ruined the greatest empire the world has ever seen.
>>69712637
Devil's Advocacy Time: Per the Geneva Convention, the terrorists forfeit ALL Geneva protection by not adhering to the rules of law. Like not wearing a uniform while conducting military acts.
>>69713317
Entering WWII didn't help either.
>>69713310
The French fucked us over many times, but I can sympathise with their treatment of the US post Suez. Such betrayal of an ally is sickening.
Also, the US continues to treat us like shit. Especially Obama.
When we leave the EU... Great Britain once again.
>>69708511
Because the left wants so badly to pretend we're not at war that they will do everything in their power to prevent Congress from issuing any declaration of war, even after 9/11.
The USA will declare war on the USA before it will ever declare war on any foreign nation ever again.
>>69713468
Yeah, that was a shit move. Especially considering the inevitable Soviet-Nazi war would exhaust both countries, leaving Britain and obi ant powers in Europe (and in the world, along with the US).
>>69713583
>Also, the US continues to treat us like shit
Deservedly
>When we leave the EU... Great Britain once again
More like from de facto US satellite to open protectorate of the US
>>69713720
Deservedly? If anything we should go full China ally. You drag us into war with Iraq, drag us into your war on terror, and snub us for the bastard French Frogs.
You bad mouth us over Libya (even though you guys were just as responsible as Cameron)... Slimy Superpower.
>>69713587
>Iraq and Afghanistan
>George W. Bush, Dick Cheyney
>the left
>>69713376
True, but there are some laws of war that must be adhered to whether the opposing side is a signatory or not. Usually around the area of treatment of civilians.
I'm a conflict where the enemy is nearly indistinguishable from civilians, and indeed hides among, pretends to be, and used civilians as human shields, its easier all round to avoid the whole idea of organised conflict at all.
>>69713720
If we leave the EU we will take the world by storm.
>>69708511
The war never ended.
>>69713955
>You drag us into war with Iraq, drag us into your war on terror, and snub us for the bastard French Frogs
>join of your own accord
>drag you into
>You bad mouth us over Libya (even though you guys were just as responsible as Cameron)
>Britain and France start shit over Libya
>Can't get anything done because they're a bunch of fuck ups
>Cry america pls help ;_;
>Expecting us to not shit talk you for fucking up something so badly and not expecting us to wash our hands of the results of actions that were yours and yours alone
Wew fucking lad
>>69714019
The only storm the world is going to see is chavs muddling around the rain soaked streets of London while your pakis fuck your women.
The US forced us to give away our Indonesian colonies, otherwise they would stop the marshallplan.
Slimy Superpower.
>>69714633
The British know that feel too... They ruined us in '56.
We need to break ties with the Slimy Superpower.
>>69710069
>could
I think you mean
>will
>>69708511
because we live in a dictatorship
>>69708511
>Why are there no more Declarations of War?
Because they cost more than pretty much anything you could gain
>>69708650
>true Good vs Evil battle
good goyim you are.
>>69708650
>good vs evil
Yeah. It's shitty the baddies won.
>>69715771
You won, you fucking klutz
>>69708511
Take your daddy issues somewhere else. How high off the ground is your monster truck raised? How big is the confederate flag hanging in your bedroom?
Beta male faggot.
>>69716143
Ah yes. Silly me. 'We won'. How could I forget?
Declarations of war are fo the people.
>American
>people
Oh, you mean the burger-eating claps who argue over abortion but defend a torture camp in one of our enemy's hometowns (Cuba)? Nah.
>Amercan people
>havng any say in whether America goes to war or where it goes to war at
S-shut up, baka.
>>69716624
>in one of our enemy's hometowns (Cuba)?
Guantanamo isn't Cuban. We built it and we've leased the land for over 100 years. Quite frankly, Guantanamo has never belonged to Cuba in any way since either of them have existed.
>>69708511
We're too comfortable with our lifestyles. We're lazy.
>>69708511
We need to break the equilibrium.
Always thought that war was bad but it's become clear that without war humans lose their sanity and become too comfortable. This will lead to our extinction
>>69708511
We are still on a War footing since World War II.
This thing about "the President is the Commander in Chief" is only DURING WAR.
The President and Congress have special powers during war and they don't want to give them up.
So now you know why war is no longer declared (or if so it is in a specifically worded document like the Gulf War covering JUST that theater and not impacting the rest of the "war" area.
>>69717179
>This thing about "the President is the Commander in Chief" is only DURING WAR.
Not according to the constitution. The President is Commander-in-Chief 24/7 whether there is war or not.
>>69717299
Exactly, and the fact that none of our candidates have any military experience or knowledge, is concerning.
One of their biggest responsibilities would be to keep our country safe.
>>69716143
WOW the good guys win again! Good thing we always fight for truth and justice!
>>69714831
>got ass handed to krauts
>We join and change the tide
>We give you're shitty cucked countries aid to rebuild
>"slimy superpower"
Don't worry brit when you all have been conqured by sandniggers we'll be there to liberate you.
>>69717671
>and the fact that none of our candidates have any military experience or knowledge
Trump went to military school, you uneducated fuck.
>>69717166
This is sadly true. War is a terrible thing; that only the foolish and evil fantasize and romance about, however, humanity without any threat is more disgusting and vile than a war ever could be.
>>69716143
Side A
>protects heritage
>provides free or cheap infrastructure and industry to benefit its people
>seeks and provides land and homes for all its people
>successfully avoids subversion by outside forces
>nation is a family held together genetic altruism
>prospers during global Great Depression
>greatest scientific minds of the time
Side B
>ignores science for ideology
>forces citizens to pay inflated prices for everything: food, land and housing
>traitors to their own heritage, screw over brothers for sake of individualism
>nation is a means of profit
>controlled by outsiders at the upper levels
>copies all of the scientific discoveries of side a
>>69708511
Because casus belli is needed.
>>69717831
Yeah, and he's done plenty in the 50 odd years to keep that knowledge fresh and viable.
>>69718106
>claim no candidates have any knowledge or experience
>move the goalposts when proven wrong
Shuck and jive, nigger.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=et-s_GnUNBw
>>69718170
Attending a school 50 years ago barely counts as either knowledge or experience. A high school diploma in a military school hardly qualifies for that aspect of his responsibilities.
Although, he may be more qualified than the other candidates for it, he's still not prepared in that category.
>>69718617
>and the fact that none of our candidates have any military experience or knowledge
>Attending a school 50 years ago barely counts as either knowledge or experience
Which is it? Barely or none? Keep shucking and jiving.
>>69708650
>Good vs Evil
How's the 5th grade going for you?
>>69718748
Do you think he has an acceptable amount of experience in this field?
I'd like to know why.
>>69718950
I think he does for the following reasons: He's not taking an active role as CiC, but is instead using his planned technocracy to full effect by appointing top military men to his cabinet. He attended military school which DOES give him experience. He doesn't move the goal posts every 10 seconds like a shucking and jiving nigger.
>>69719157
I'm still trying to find the goal posts, I'm just testing the waters.
So you're just going to trust in his ability to appoint people who do know military strategy? I mean, that would be okay if we knew who those people would be now (Which we may for all I know), but we shouldn't wait until he's already president to start wondering who he's going to trust with our nation's security.
>>69708511
Because we are at a continuing, unending state of war it no longer has to be declared.
And CONgress no longer decides for or against war. Somebody else does.
Who?
>>69719663
He's been hinting at General Mattis so... no. I am not worried. Stop being a faggot.
>>69718748
The whole problem with this shitty chain of responses lies with you taking what he said literally and then being as aghast as a Victorian woman when it turns out he actually means "little to no relevant experience".
>Hurr durr I'll rather argue over semantics rather than argue against what has been clearly established as his viewpoints
>>69717907
I see countries from both sides doing both things. Are you really saying it's black and white?
>>69713991
It's funny how you think a double negative proves your point.
If Trump is elected, the USA will go to literal war with itself. The left will declare war, and even though they will try to fight unarmed, even unarmed people can kill when numbers are on their side.
>>69708650
I only wish that GOOD had won...sad really.
>>69721921
>If Trump is elected, the USA will go to literal war with itself. The left will declare war, and even though they will try to fight unarmed, even unarmed people can kill when numbers are on their side.
What movie do you think you're living in?
>>69711577
>"we lost"
>lost
>Britain
>ever
Topkekm8, the British have literally never lost a war.
>>69723093
Oh is that right?
What about that American war for independence?
And Rhodesia?
>>69723093
>American Revolution
>1812
>WW1, until Americans
>WW2, until Americans
>yfw Britain can't win a war unless they're literally fighting tribesmen with sticks
You're the cucks of the world, now, deal with it.
>>69708511
just the opposite
>>69723316
>>69723391
>American war for independence - not literally giving independence to every country within the empire for free - burned down white-house when Americucks chimped out - called it a day and went home - didn't even bother fixing the country comprised from the peasants and scum of Europe
>Won WWI and WWII despite being a tiny country and having the entirety of Europe teaming up with Germany to go to war with us.
>mfw how can Europe even compete?
>mfw Britain might lose the odd battle, but always wins the war
The invincible lion.
>>69724829
>this is what britbongs actually believe
>>69725056
>UNITED KINGDOM
>N
>D
>E
>F
>E
>A
>T
>E
>D
>>69711866
True. Plus a declaration of war means something big. It implies total war, which hasn't been waged since WW2. The mass bombing in Vietnam was not accompanied by a wholesale invasion of Vietnam, a la d day.
>>69713583
Rofl. You have tons of poos in the loos and pakis. You'll never be an empire ever again Airstrip One.
>>69714633
What is the Atlantic Charter...
>>69708650
>The world is so connected and careful now, something like WW2 will never happen again.
Yeah and weapons are so devastating that no one could ever imagine waging a modern war, right?
And the powers that be are simply too powerful for war between them to be worthwhile, right?
Protip: These exact same things were being said on the eve of WWI, and history just LOVES to repeat itself.
>>69708650
Correct, Germans were good and USA was evil.
>>69715771
>>69715771
This.
>>69716497
What a funny looking We that is entirely composed of Khazar.
>>69708650
>good vs evil
it's amazing how stupid and indoctrinated people are to this very day
>>69721921
A couple of placed machine guns can handle that.
>>69727788
he's probably underaged.
