Amendment

Should there be a constitutional amendment requiring that, in future wars, at least one battle be lost BEFORE congress can surrender?

>>1
Technically, the "war" in Iraq isn't a war, so the argument that you're so cleverly implying isn't applicable.

Also, why aren't you in Iraq?

Just because a battle hasn't been lost, doesn't mean the cost both in deploying and supplying an army as well as the cost in human lives, ours and theirs, as well as the lives of innocent civilians isn't too high. It's a WAR man, just because we're winning, doesn't mean we should keep killing until everyone is dead.

>>2-
>>1 probably isn't physically fit enough to serve. Typical 4channer. :\