Congress has formally declared war only 11 times in U.S. history, and authorized the use of military force 11 times.

All the Previous Declarations of War

As we head into a period of vigorous congressional debate over whether to authorize the use of force against Syria, it's instructive to look back at America's history of congressional war declarations.  The Congressional Research Service put together a great mini-history in 2011, "Declarations of War and Authorizations for the Use of Military Force: Historical Background and Legal Implications," by Jennifer Elsea and Richard Grimmett, which is worth a read at this juncture.

The obvious take-home is that America has done a better job of winning its declared wars in the last century than achieving clear-cut victories in ventures authorized under legislative measures that fell short of a formal declaration of war.

Here are the 11 formal declarations of war:

And here are the 11 conflicts governed by congressional legislation authorizing force but not declaring war, per the CRS report.

• May 28, 1798 and July 9, 1798. FRANCE. Legislation  authorizing the president to instruct commanders of U.S. Navy warships to “subdue, seize and take any armed French vessel which shall be found within the jurisdictional limits of the United States, or elsewhere, on the high seas...”
• February 6, 1802. TRIPOLI. Legislation authorizing the president to “equip, officer, man, and employ such of the armed vessels of the United States as may be judged requisite...for protecting effectually the commerce and seamen thereof on the Atlantic ocean, the Mediterranean and adjoining seas" in response to threats from Tripoli.
• March 3, 1815. ALGERIA. Legislation authorizing the president to use the U.S. Navy, “as judged requisite by the President” to protect the “commerce and seamen” of the United States on the “Atlantic Ocean, the Mediterranean and adjoining seas” in response to conflict with the Dey and Regency of Algiers.
• March 3, 1819. PIRATES. Legislation enacted “to protect the commerce of the United States, and punish the crime of piracy.”
• January 29, 1955. FORMOSA. Legislation authorizing the president to “employ the Armed Forces of the United States as he deems necessary for the specific purpose of securing and protecting Formosa, and the Pescadores against armed attack....”
• March 9, 1957. THE MIDDLE EAST. “To undertake, in the general area of the Middle East, military assistance programs with any nation or group of nations of that area desiring such assistance.”
• August 10, 1964. SOUTHEAST ASIA. Gulf of Tonkin resolution.
• October 12, 1983. LEBANON. "The Multinational Force in Lebanon Resolution."
• January 12, 1991. IRAQ. Congress passed the “Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution.”
• September 18, 2001. TERRORISTS. A joint resolution to authorize "the president to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons."
• October 16, 2002. IRAQ. "Authorization for Use of Military Force against Iraq Resolution."

Assad: "The Middle East is a powder keg, there is risk of a regional war"

Syrian President again threatened with the expansion of the conflict if the West launches military action against him."The chaos and extremism will spread,"    i'm going to break the page, because this article is translated from Spanish to English, or you can just do it yourself?  

’90% of Christians Driven Out of Homs, Syria’ or Let’s call It what it really is ‘Ethnic Christian Cleansing.’

President Obama condemned the Syrian government for trying to protect Alawites, Christians, the role of women in society, and all Syrians who oppose Sunni Islamic radicalism. President Obama commented that “I strongly condemn the Syrian government’s unspeakable assault against the people of Homs.” However, is President Obama going to condemn the ethnic cleansing of 90% of the Christian community from Homs by forces he eulogizes and whom he deems to be innocent?

If President Obama doesn’t condemn the ethnic cleansing of Christians in Homs then his silence, and the silence of others who also desire to “hide the civilization struggle,” shames all senior politicians and implies that they support the destruction of the Christian presence in this city. Therefore, will Obama condemn the radical Sunni Islamic assault against unarmed Christians?

If you turn the clock back to Iraq then 60% of the Christian community fled this country after the American led invasion. The “bleeding of the Christian presence” in Iraq is a clear reminder that the embattled Christians of the Middle East have been abandoned by the West. Therefore, they have been left to the sword of radical Sunni Islam. This in turn leads to greater militancy and hatred — and the next move is then against moderate Sunni Muslims who want to co-exist because their voices are crushed by indoctrination and fear.

It is ironic, because President Obama and Hillary Clinton will talk about the forces of good but it was the government of Syria which allowed 100,000 Christians to flee to this multi-religious society, which is based on secularism. Christians fleeing Iraq either stayed in Syria or the breathing space enabled them to move to other nations. However, it is clear that the government of Bashar al-Assad provided them with protection from the forces of radical Islam.

Agenzia Fides, Vatican News Agency, comments that “in Homs there is “an ongoing ethnic cleansing of Christians”, carried out by members of the “Brigade Faruq”, close to Al Qaeda…Militant armed Islamists — says the note — have managed to expel 90% of Christians in Homs and confiscated their homes by force.”

“According to Orthodox Metropolitan sources, the militants went door to door in the neighborhoods of Hamidiya and Bustan al-Diwan, forcing Christians to flee, without giving them the chance to take their belongings. The “Faruq Brigade” is run by armed elements of Al-Qaeda and various Wahhabi groups and includes mercenaries from Libya and Iraq.”  MORE

GUIDE TO WAHHABI ORGANIZATIONS IN NORTH AMERICA
By Jamaluddin B. Hoffman

I. HISTORY OF THE WAHHABI MOVEMENT
The contemporary Wahhabi movement is the modern outgrowth of a 250-year-old
schism within Islam that was sparked by a radical evangelist named Muhammad ibn Abdul
Wahhab (1703-1792). Ibn Abdul Wahhab believed that Islam had been corrupted by countless
errors and innovations, which he set out to purge with puritanical zeal.
1
He and his followers
denounced intellectualism, mysticism and traditional Islamic spirituality. They declared most of
the Islamic scholars, thinkers and clerics that preceded them heretics and rejected the classical
schools of Islamic jurisprudence that were the guarantors of moderation in traditional Muslim
society. This is significant because it allowed the Wahhabis to interpret Islam according to their
own whims – accepting those elements that supported their aims and ambitions, and rejecting
whatever stood in their way. Anyone who failed to embrace Ibn Abdul Wahhab’s new doctrine
was declared an “unbeliever.” Along with Jews, Christians and people of other faiths, they were
declared “enemies of Islam” and became the target of a vicious crusade aimed at “purifying the
faith.

Short URL: http://www.newsnet14.com/?p=99383