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
Endless war:
http://thehill.com/policy/defense/218656-pentagon-isis-campaign-could-last-years
“DBQ has agreed that we should have a draft, she’s stated that in a different thread a couple of weeks ago. ”
You forgot the important part, or left it off purposely to distort what I have said. I favor a draft….. IF we are going to declare a war or go to war. IF. A draft will force our so called leaders to be very serious about their decisions and make them accountable for those decisions.
IF.
If stating that IF are forced to go to war or IF we choose to go to war we must fight to win makes me a warmonger in your eyes. I can live with that. 🙂
DBQ – you guys realize that it will take about a year to ramp up to a full-time draft.
Jim22, so if one’s called a war monger it’s name calling? Where were you when we were being called “cultists” daily? Talk about thin skin. So it appears you are not a war monger, but you are mistaken in thinking our volunteer army can handle any more long protracted wars. Your isolationism isn’t influencing those who are engaging in war. Maybe you should write them a letter?
http://www.lawfareblog.com/2014/09/the-draft-aumfs-for-the-islamic-state-do-not-limit-congressional-authorization-on-ground-troops-or-geography-or-associated-forces/ “By Jack Goldsmith
Thursday, September 18, 2014 at 8:12 AM
The two most promising Islamic State AUMFs I have seen are the one sponsored by Representative Schiff and the one sponsored by Senator Kaine. Both drafts, in different ways, purport to limit the authorization for the President to use force against the Islamic State in at least three respects: (1) They authorize force only in Iraq and Syria, (2) They do not authorize ground troops (except for training or rescue situations, and the like), and (3) They do not authorize force against associated forces (though Kaine’s does if a certain report is filed).
The draft AUMFs appear to be entirely ineffective in limiting congressional authorization to use force against the Islamic State in these three respects. The reason is that the limitations in the draft AUMFs, by their terms, apply only to the specific authorizations in the draft AUMFs. They do not affect Congress’s authorization of force under the 2001 AUMF. The Obama administration interprets the 2001 AUMF as an independent authorization of force against the Islamic State, and the 2001 AUMF does not contain any of the limitations. Assume that one of the draft AUMFs becomes law. If the President decides that he wants to use ground troops in combat against the Islamic State, or that he wants to use force against Islamic State in Lebanon, or that he wants to go after forces associated with the Islamic State, he can simply choose to base his action on the 2001 AUMF. And he could still maintain that Congress authorized the action despite the newer AUMFs.
If Congress wants to limit its authorization of force as applied to the Islamic State concerning geography, ground troops, and associated forces, it must also specifically amend the 2001 AUMF to make plain that the 2001 AUMF itself does not authorize force against the Islamic State outside of Iraq and Syria, or against associated forces of the Islamic State, or involving ground troops against the Islamic State. (I note that the Schiff AUMF sunsets the 2001 AUMF after 18 months, and thus would eliminate all independent authorizations under the 2001 AUMF 18 months after the new Islamic State AUMF comes in to force.)
Annie – “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.”
No you are wrong Annie, I do care, I’m more of an isolationist. I would like us to pull out of everywhere including Europe. It would be fun to watch all their socialist economies collapse when they actually would have to fund a military. They’ve shown in the past that they play so well with each other.
Do you have anyone in the volunteer fire service? I guess I will have to ask this question before helping anyone with the volunteer fire dept. I belong to. Since, without any “skin in the game” why would I help them.
Max, Again, where is code pink today? Where’s all the press footage of the “massive” demonstration which was about what? Let me know when the million man march forms against the chosen one.
Annie, Good work on the name calling too. Well done in the deflecting dept. Lerner would be proud of you.
“Just call him Mr. O’Bush”
~+~
Maybe he could use it the next time he visits Ireland and proclaims his Irish heritage.
Here’s the great political scientist himself pointing out yet another truism of the human condition and the reason for war along with Justice’s place in it:
So that in the nature of man we find three principal causes of quarrel. First, competition; secondly, diffidence; thirdly, glory.
The first maketh man invade for gain; the second, for safety; and the third, for reputation. The first use violence, to make themselves masters of other men’s persons, wives, children, and cattle; the second, to defend them; the third, for trifles, as a word, a smile, a different opinion, and any other sign of undervalue, either direct in their persons or by reflection in their kindred, their friends, their nation, their profession, or their name.
Hereby it is manifest that, during the time men live without a common power to keep them all in awe, they are in that condition which is called war, and such a war as is of every man against every man. For ‘war’ consisteth not in battle only or the act of fighting, but in a tract of time wherein the will to contend by battle is sufficiently known, and therefore the notion of ‘time’ is to be considered in the nature of war, as it is in the nature of weather. For as the nature of foul weather lieth not in a shower or two of rain but in an inclination thereto of many days together, so the nature of war consisteth not in actual fighting but in the known disposition thereto during all the time there is no assurance to the contrary. All other time is ‘peace.’
(…)
To this war of every man against every man, this also is consequent; that nothing can be unjust. The notions of right and wrong, justice and injustice, have there no place. Where there is no common power, there is no law; where no law, no injustice. Force and fraud are in war the two cardinal virtues. Justice and injustice are none of the faculties neither of the body nor mind. If they were, they might be in a man that were alone in the world, as well as his senses and passions. They are qualities that relate to men in society, not in solitude. It is consequent also to the same condition that there be no propriety, no dominion, no mine and thine distinct; but only that to be every man’s that he can get, and for so long as he can keep it. And thus much for the ill condition which man by mere nature is actually placed in; though with a possibility to come out of it, consisting partly in the passions, partly in his reason.
The passions that incline men to peace are: fear of death; desire of such things as are necessary to commodious living; and a hope by their industry to obtain them.
~Sir Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan,Chapter XIII
I believe this war is illegal because Congress did not declare it. However, I would also be interested in a more detailed explanation of the basis for the contention that it violates international law (now I really wish I had taken the class when I was in law school). Additionally, I know that the famous anti-war activist David Swanson has published a book which I believe is entitled “War Is Illegal,” claiming that the Kellogg-Briand pact is still in force and that war is a violation of it. If Prof. Turley, or the members of his brain trust, or any commentators wish to comment or enlighten on any of the foregoing, it would be appreciated.
Congress cannot declare war without being asked. They did pass the War Powers Act which allows the President to act on his own volition for 90 days before coming back to them. However, since the Obama administration is having a difficult time calling this war, I am not sure what power the President is operating under. Possibly authority under the Secretary of Education?
Just call him Mr. O’Bush…
Our Generals and Admirals should call DBQ and take her expert military advice under consideration. Where would they be without the armchair warriors?
https://twitter.com/chrislhayes/status/514195009818882049
https://twitter.com/trevortimm/status/514452437210390530
https://twitter.com/trevortimm/status/514479053051404288
Ryan Lizza just tweeted the new score in terms of countries bombed.
Obama = 7
Bush = 4.
The Nobel Peace Prize may be holding Obama back from stretching out his lead.
For a man who bemoaned the “negative liberties” in our Constitution, he’s certainly devoted a great deal of effort telling our enemies what he won’t do. That being said, I would not be the least surprised to find him as “insincere” on his foreign policy promises as he is on the domestic.
As I have said in other commentaries on this topic. No one who is sane wants war or looks forward to war. HOWEVER, if you are going to go to war, you should be in it to win. Win quickly. Win decisively. And don’t flub the follow up of the war. IF that takes actual troops on the ground instead of a protracted and probably not effective air campaign, then that is what it should be.
When you fight an ineffective, half-hearted war, you are wasteful of lives and of treasure. By ineffective actions in Iraq, crippling the troops with stupid rules of combat, we have literally thrown those brave troops lives away. When you see that your efforts are useless and being countered by rules from your own side and when you get back and see that your efforts are not appreciated, it is no wonder that there are psychological problems.
A war must be an effort by ALL of the people, not just a few volunteers. Everyone should have some skin in the game and make some sacrifices, otherwise it isn’t a war and we might as well just go play checkers someplace quiet and wait for the enemy to come overwhelm us. If you are capable, you should actively participate. If you are not capable (physically or due to age) there are other ways to contribute and support the effort. So, yes. I am in favor of a draft, IF we go to war. When there is a draft, the powers that be (government and congress) will have to be more serious about their decisions. Now they can just go home, pretend nothing is happening, avoid making the hard decisions ….and thus we just drift aimlessly along into conflict after conflict with no resolution and no accountability for the people who put us there.
War is NOT a spectator sport.
Contrary to some people’s perception, some other of us do have flesh and blood in the mix. Two of my nephews are still currently in the Army. One other has been discharged and was a Ranger. We don’t know where he is, but we do know that he is very badly psychologically damaged. If we had been fighting a REAL war. One to WIN instead of appease public opinion, things may have worked out differently for him AND for the United States.
My fear is that this latest political ploy by this current administration is going to be yet another halfway effort with no strategy. No end game. No chance to win and that it is going to result in more wasteful deaths, bleed money from our already crippled economy and do NOTHING to solve the problem.
Half @ssed is not the way to do anything, much less fight a war.
Kurds never giving up? You can actually call them the first group over there fighting for their own state. Used to be terrorists, but they bought different hats so now they are good guys.
War is funded therefore, I presume, declared by Congress. The Executive executes what Congress legislates.
We have King Obama, a dictator, usurping power.
Congress has the constitutional duty and authority to impeach a nefarious executive and set the direction of the country.
The people, through Congress, are the sovereigns, the government is the subject of the sovereign.
Obama’s War is as unconstitutional as Crazy Abe’s.
Obviously the Congress (the party with standing) and, by extension, the judicial branch have abandoned and undermined the Constitution in favor of unrestrained “strong man” dictatorship. Congress has been derelict and the judicial branch has “interpreted” and “legislated from the bench.”
The Constitution has been replaced with the Communist Manifesto:
“If you plunge a frog into boiling water, it will immediately jump out. But if you place the frog into cool water and slowly heat it to boiling, the frog won’t notice and will slowly cook to death.”
The collectivist unionist dictatorship of the proletariat is firmly in control.
When do constitutional scholars reveal and expose the folly of our ways?
Edmund Burke –
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing”
I think members of Congress knew his plans, via closed meetings. We are late to this party, but at least have shown up. Bush was completely open that we were at war with a different kind of enemy. Now Obama golfs and parties until the country is begging for bombs. What a luxury for a President. Are the haters going to attack Obama as they did Bush? Bush started acting on 9/11/01. Not sure when Obama decided to do what’s happening today. I’m not sure this isn’t a political move. I cannot trust Obama at all. I am proud of our military. This is “shock and awe” we are capable of and the world now sees our military doesn’t fool around. I also thank the Kurds for never giving up.