I just completed a two-city debate with former Bush official John Yoo on executive power with a focus on undeclared wars. It appears Yoo won the debate . . . at least with President Obama. Indeed, Yoo appears to have had Obama at “hello” to quote Jerry Maguire. Without any declaration of war, Obama has launched attacks against targets in Syria — an act of war by any measure and a violation of international law.
We have been discussing the growing concerns over President Barack Obama’s series of unilateral actions in ordering agencies not to enforce law, effectively rewriting laws, and moving hundreds of millions of dollars from appropriated purposes to areas of his choosing. One of the greatest concerns has been his unchecked authority asserted in the national security area.
The most serious acts of unilateral presidential action falls within war powers — powers that the Framers expressly and carefully limited to prevent precisely this type of attack. Of course, the Administration does not use the word “war.” I previously represented members of Congress in challenging Obama’s intervention in the Libyan civil war without a declaration from Congress. In the case, President Obama insisted that he alone determines what is a war and therefore when he needs a declaration. Since the court would not recognize standing to challenge the war, it left Obama free to engage in war operations in any country of his choosing.
The White House insisted that this was “military action” but that “[g]iven that these operations are ongoing, we are not in a position to provide additional details at this time. The decision to conduct theses strikes was made earlier today by the U.S. Central Command commander under authorization granted him by the commander in chief.”
The Administration is now calling this a “sustained campaign” with no estimate on how long it will take. So we are again attacking another nation without a declaration or even a debate in Congress. Members are allowed to avoid their constitutional duties of clearly declaring a war while the President has been allowed, again, to jettison any limitations on his ability to wage war.
It is one thing to take out our own captured Humvees (with missiles costing $250,000 a shot) in Iraq with the permission of the country and hitting cities and targets in Syria against the express position of the government. That is clearly an act of war to prosecute a military campaign against the territory of a sovereign nation.
We are continuing an assault on basic principles of international war and returning the word to a state of nature. When another country elects to take our individuals or targets in the United States, what precisely will we claim as authority. We have assumed the role of Roper from “A Man For All Seasons“:
William Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!
Sir Thomas More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
William Roper: Yes, I’d cut down every law in England to do that!
Sir Thomas More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned ’round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man’s laws, not God’s! And if you cut them down, and you’re just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I’d give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety’s sake!
Source: ABC News
“Shock & Awe In Syria: It never Works”
http://www.juancole.com/2014/09/shock-never-works.html
I have to wonder if there was not some Back Channel assent from President Assad to what is happening militarily.
I had thought of the Piracy Clauses in the constitution that could be used as being an interesting approach. Yet for better or worse I believe the president has the statutory authority to initiate these actions from our legal system. Internationally it might be different. Yet, if there was an agreement from the Syrian government to attack the Islamic State the violation of international law would be rather moot.
I still believe whenever possible the president should receive authorization from Congress at least to remove the taint of unilateralism. It could have been done in this case.
Congress needs to vote in favor of a use of force resolution authorizing the Commander in Chief to initiate and proceed until death to them part the terrorists who operate in those Pirate Territories east of Corfu. We do not need a Declaration of War. That is what one needs when one has a nation state on the other side. What we have are terrorists who change their names once in a while to protect the guilty. al Qaeda this week, ISis that week, Al Capone next week. These are not legitimate military persons in uniform fighting at the direction of a legitimate nation state. They are terrorists and pirates. Take no prisoners. Have them walk the plank. No more trials at Gitmo and no more prisoners at Gitmo. Find em, bomb em, slit their throats, forget em. Drop the dead bodies out of airplanes onto their home villages.
Americans elect WAR PRESIDENTS… who go to bed with WAR on their mind.
Khorasan… When has Obama ever spoke of bombing this group?
Because America is engaging them.
Thanks Justice Holmes. Glad you see it. Like I keep saying, if there was real concern, Turkey could blow them out like a candle. We’ll even sell Turkey more military hardware, so the defense industry still turns an ugly profit.
Maybe we could think about the nasty people we have here now. Like those alleged perpetrators of those horrible crimes right here whom the Professor posted about.
slohrss29 Thanks Justice Holmes. Glad you see it. Like I keep saying, if there was real concern, Turkey could blow them out like a candle. We’ll even sell Turkey more military hardware, so the defense industry still turns an ugly profit.
Turkey just got their 40 hostages back from ISIS. You really think they didn’t make some kind of a deal not to go after ISIS or get involved?
Joan Walsh:
Tuesday, Sep 23, 2014 12:56 PM EST
“The Dick Cheney view of presidential power is winning”
“Feckless Congress campaigns instead of voting on Syrian airstrikes, while McCain and Graham want to move on Assad”
““[Congress has] sort of allowed the Cheney pre-emptive war doctrine to exist by another name,” Kaine told the Huffington Post Tuesday. “In this instance, they allowed the president to say, ‘ISIL [the Islamic State] is the bad guys, and I can go after them even though there has been testimony that they pose no imminent threat of attack on the United States.’ If the president just gets to do this without Congress, then we will be embracing the Cheney pre-emptive war doctrine, which I think is just brutally wrong.”
Rep. Adam Smith, the ranking member on the House Committee, told MSNBC Monday night that Congress should return to vote on authorizing airstrikes: “This is, without question, war. This is something that Congress should authorize.”
Smith and Kaine are right, and the relative silence from Congress in the wake of last night’s airstrikes is troubling. …
GOP Congressman Jack Kingston, who’s on his way out of Congress after losing his Georgia Senate primary bid, spoke rare truth about his colleagues’ refusal to schedule a vote on the Syrian strikes before the midterms. ”A lot of people would like to stay on the sideline and say, ‘Just bomb the place and tell us about it later,’” said Kingston. “It’s an election year. A lot of Democrats don’t know how it would play in their party, and Republicans don’t want to change anything. We like the path we’re on now. We can denounce it if it goes bad, and praise it if it goes well and ask what took him so long.” (Kingston thinks Congress should vote on the airstrikes, but he told me Friday, on the set of “Real Time with Bill Maher,” that he doesn’t believe Obama needs authorization legally to act.)
With the president set to address the U.N. General Assembly, it’s a tense time for the U.S. to challenge international law. “In the aftermath of Russia’s clear violation of international law in Ukraine, we should be seen as committing further to the adherence of international norms, not undermining it,” the Center for American Progress’s Ken Gude, who has supported the anti-ISIS campaign in Iraq, told the Daily Beast. “What could happen here is that the norms that govern states’ application of force take a hit and those norms, largely enforced by the U.S. and that work together for the benefit of America and our allies, could be weakened.”
These are all questions Congress should be asking, but very few in Congress seem to care. With military and civilian leaders saying the Syrian campaign could last not weeks or months but years, Congress needs to vote to authorize what is clearly a new war.”
Annie
I think the real question both Nick and Bunny miss, every time is:
What tour of duty are they waiting to be deployed out for? 2? 3? 8?
Na-DA!
http://youtu.be/O0e_N0rzNWY
p.s.
Jim22, Code Pink ALERT! in video.
Where, Jimm? Here Jim. LOOK!
Blood thirsty Americans…
… Deciding who’s a great leader by what people this leader will kill.
Jim22, DBQ has agreed that we should have a draft, she’s stated that in a different thread a couple of weeks ago. Go argue with her. You don’t want your loved ones to be subject to the draft? Our volunteer army will not be sufficient with the “REAL war” DBQ and Spinelli are calling for. It’s obvious you don’t care if our troops and veterans have the highest rates of PTSD and suicide ever. War mongers should be willing to send their own flesh and blood.
Bush War Doctrine redux
Senator Obama
Bush Obama
Jimm22
An EMPIRE deserves a recruiting force…
… Who else can foist this war economy?
Jimm22
That you have to ask is a sign you aren’t paying attention…
ISIS is a Muslim problem and they should be standing up to them. The US has no business trying to end this crazy religious war. I get it that Obama was afraid he was looking “weak” but his weakness is that he has no spine not that he won’t bomb anyone.
Annie, We’ve had this debate before. Our military is voluntary. The “skin in the game” argument is wrong. Does anyone know when code pink is going to march and protest?
Annie makes a point. It is so easy to be self-righteous when we are quick to offer up everyone else’s kids lives at risk. War should be something everyone pays for immediately. Armchair generals [chicken hawks] (Lindsay Graham?????) yes, plenty of them.
Please keep the argument faithful and on the up and up. ISIS–Nazi war machine?? I REALLY don’t think so. That is the same old “go-to” argument everyone else uses. The “Hitler” of the week argument. Want to stop ISIS, tell Saudi Arabia to stop ISIS.
*See the*