In response to:

The Surprising Gift of 'Zero Dark Thirty'

Joseph1575 Wrote: Jan 18, 2013 3:04 AM
That's because they have no concept of what is required to actually fight a war. The US Armed Forces has not been "cut loose to fight a 'war'", since WWII.
t252 Wrote: Jan 18, 2013 9:52 PM
which is nonsense, whether congress declares or not, if we are fighting we are at war, and should treat it as such.
Drifter33 Wrote: Jan 18, 2013 11:47 AM
...Or it could be that the Congress lacks the guts to act in any meaningful way--it might hurt one's re-election chances if one can't be seen to be on both sides of every issue, after all.

A formal declaration of war is unequivocal--a pasty, clammy-handed politician with an eye on a perpetual seat in the hall won't like to be forced into a binary decision.
Fil-TX Wrote: Jan 18, 2013 10:38 AM
...Or it could be that congress wanted manage the hostilies rather than let the generals and the defense dept actually try to defeat our enemies.
barrym Wrote: Jan 18, 2013 8:41 AM
...and that's because congress has not declared war since WWII.

When it comes to Kathryn Bigelow’s “Zero Dark Thirty,” there are two kinds of people-- those who have seen it and those who should.

Emerging from any theater afterward, there will be two kinds of people-- those who grasp that enhanced interrogations save lives, and those who do not.

As a longtime member of the first group, I was gratified to the point of surprise that a product out of Hollywood depicted our harshest interrogations without an accompanying ham-fisted condemnation.

But the even greater praise for “Zero Dark Thirty” is that nor does it grab you by the lapels and...