We have every right, but not a duty, to wipe this scum off the face of the earth.

ouch. . there is a lot of truth in what you wrote here. -- j
.

The writ of habeas corpus can only lapse "in cases of rebellion or invasion"--meaning fighting on American soil. Congress may pass a law any time it pleases to quarter troops in people's houses--but I do recall that, during the housing shortage of WWII, Congress literally called for volunteers for quartering troops, chiefly officers, in private houses on the home front.

Good point.

Great analogy.

Agreed. Prevent them from becoming anything resembling a nation by destroying all known ISIS depots.

Agreed, ISIS is more like a franchise nation than a nation state. That is to say, it delivers fast and ready insanity wherever its proponent factions find the means to operate. It should be treated as an international gang and prosecuted with a resolve commensurable to it's destructive potential.

I hope that you are not suggesting that we should repair
the areas overseas which we have affected. . we might
consider repairing the U.S. first, don't you think? -- j
.

The subject of the post is declaring war on ISIS. The aggressive Christian proselytizing by WND is aimed at our politicians and their constituents to demonize and destroy Muslim populations so that Christian ideology can control the U.S. if not the world. Yes, consider the source, as it is tainted. The world may not be burning down, but WND is pushing that belief and hastening its eventuation.

As for declaring war on ISIS, it would acknowledge and legitimate their claim to be a nation-state. Declaring war is futile when there is already continuous guerrilla action running. We created it, and we are deluded to think we can clean up our mess by totally wiping out their population, i.e. genocide. The only way to win is not to play. It is insane to waste trillions of dollars of our people's substance and future on escalating a religion-driven agenda. Congress should declare an immediate armistice, withdraw all troops from all foreign occupations, and put all those unemployed warriors to work repairing the damage we've caused.

friends is friends, Sam;;; Thanks For Your Vision! -- j
.

let's see ... mythological war ... seems strange and unlikely
to be accepted by congress and the populace. -- j
.

Blinders.....There is a big problem with the question, other than the lack of a nation state as others have said. The main reason that would never happen is because WE created ISIS, we fund ISIS, we supply ISIS with weapons. They are mercenaries. We hired them to destabilize Libya and now Syria. We apparently don't care that they rape women, kill children, and behead Christians and Jews - they are protecting "American Interests", whatever those are.

So, we would essentially be declaring war on our own "guys". That is why Putin made a brilliant chess move, daring us to admit it.

Look at the oil tanker idiocy. Putin makes a statement that ISIS is making money on oil and that he has been bombing their supply. (Not outright revealing who is buying it) A couple days later, the US media puts out a story that we destroyed an oil tanker convoy, using Russian video footage, mind you. And, then it comes out that we dropped leaflets on the convoy to give them a 45 minute heads up so the operators could live to sell oil again.

As for a Constitutional question (if ISIS wasn't our proxy), the only option is a Letter of Marque and Reprisal. That is the only option for non-state aggression. Aside from our own military operations, it even gives the government the ability to hire mercenary companies like Black Water/XE/whatever they call themselves these days. This is what Ron Paul tried to get after 9/11. But, instead, we decided to install a military dictator and participate in a civil war, and sell heroine, ignoring the original target. Hmm......

Hmm, a declared war on the very creatures created by the shadows of the same kakistocracatic (variant of kakistocracy) government they perpetuate...However, now that the beast of all beasts has been created, the question is how to dispose of it. It could be done quickly. Ideally by the same creatures that created the beast in the first place. At their own expense would be sadly too much to even ask for.

It's like destroying your own foot for stepping in crap (which was your own) because you brought it into the house.
Proof positive why it's not wise to be a friend nor do a favor for government; it will turn on you and itself eventually.

And yes, I do realize this is an Albert Pike like plan to create a 3rd war and institute a one world kakistocracy., [world government comprised of the worst and least qualified in the smaller kakistocracies] Can you say Hegelian Dialectic?

ISIS does expressly assert it is a nation state. They have a "leader". They hold geographic territory. They have a group of bureaucrats administering their state.

I would vote OUT any politician who wants to fight ISIS. Its a sectarian conflict between SUNNI and SHIITE sects. Let them fight each other for ALLAH and kill each other off and go to "heaven" or whatever it is they think is there.

I think soldiers should really consider whether to put their lives on the line for the stupid political agendas of our leaders. I wouldnt even enter the armed forces at this point. who wants to fight some religious fanatics for other religious fanatics who dont want you there in the first place.

Isis is not a nation-state. If Congress did declare
war on it, how would we know when it was over?
Somebody might sign a surrender, and then other
parts of it go on fighting. So it would go on and on
and on. I don't say we shouldn't fight it, but I am troubled as to knowing just when it would be
over, and when to declare victory (a unilateral
declaration, as there would be no central nation-
state authority to say, "We surrender, you win'',
as at the end of World War II).

I'm not a lawyer, but I think a formal Declaration of War is like any other piece of legislation. If it passes the House, the Senate must then sign on to it, and then the President has to sign it or veto it. If a veto happens, the Senate can override with a 2/3 majority and it then becomes Law. It's pretty clear Obama would veto, but it would then be up to the Senate to override. Even if they did override, Obama has a track record of not giving a shit about what "The Law" says, unless he personally believes in it - hence, queer marriage is "The Law of the Land," but immigration law doesn't count.

Bush jr pushed the idea that "Islam is a religion of peace." Remember his speach after 9/11, when he took his shoes off in a mosque and tried to sell the world this garbage? Meanwhile, Obama has made Muslims into protected species (along with gays and transsexuals) and Islam call to prayer "the most beautiful music to [his] ears" (said so by the deity Himself in an interview).