No, what’s silly is to counter an argument with a made-up definition, and then put forth another argument with a different definition. “Grave and gathering” does not equal “crisis”, as you have defined it. Look at the time lag between the Afghanistan AUMF and our military strikes there-- a few weeks. The Iraq AUMF was voted in Oct and we didn’t strike until Mar the following year.
Afghanistan was, by your definition, a crisis. We weren’t even 100% certain where the attacks came from when the AUMF was voted on-- just 3 days after Sept 11. Iraq was not like that at all. If you’d like to change your definition, that’s fine. But it’s yours until you do so.
Bush’s stock is so low at the moment, I feel if there were any terrorist attack during his remaining watch the first question would be, “Did Bush arrange this so McCain would win the election?”
Look at what happened when Clinton ordered strikes on terrorist bases right before his impeachment proceedings. He was instantly accused of trying to wag the dog, to the degree where his detractors now forget Clinton even did anything in the Warr on Global Terra.
I’d wager if anything big happened before November, Bush and his cronies would be (in the eyes of the media) prime suspect #1.
Well, that was an attack by the US, not an attack on the US. The latter we always control. The former, not. But the real “wag the dog” stuff was Iraq and Serbia, not Sudan.
I’d take that bet, but you have to define “the media” first.