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
Paul, So you’re saying you had some Eddie Haskell in you as a youth. I can see that!
Nick – no Eddie Haskell. I was raised to be polite. It just carried over into dating. I saw dating as strategic rather than tactic. 🙂
leej, Vicious? These are very tough times for faithful Dems like yourself. I am direct and honest in my writing and in my personal interactions. I said some very direct and honest stuff about my family when we met. I say direct and honest stuff here. I realize leej, I come from a different world than yourself. There is the male/female thing. But, I worked in the justice system. I had GOOD friends cross examine me on the stand and let me tell you, it was sometimes EXPONENTIALLY tougher than ANYTHING I have said to you. Afterward we go have a beer. So, combine your disappointment w/ how things are going in this country, w/ our different backgrounds, and the dynamic is fraught w/ danger. I could tell the race thing was on your mind. If the way I said it was offensive to you, I apologize. But let me tell you what you would have seen on my face if we were discussing this in person. You would have seen my eyes smiling. Having met me, you can picture that look I think. There was no malice. 80% of all communication is nonverbal. So, here’s my promise. I won’t bust chops like I did w/ you. Maybe on a non political thread, but not on a thread like this. I ask that you realize you can be defensive about Obama and how things are going. If we both do that, we should be cool. I want us to be cool. I like you. I liked your book. I am going to put it in one of those little free library boxes in Madison for someone else to read. I spread my wives book across the country leaving it in hotels, coffee shops, etc.
Jon,
Am I to understand that a reference to a word or an acknowledgment of the use of a word that would be considered in violation of the banned words in the civility section, without saying the word or referencing the word is now sufficient grounds for deletion of a comment is now your addition to the civility rules?
Do you think that your new policy would pass constitutional muster? Don’t you think that the policy is void for vagueness? Though you may have a rational basis for its implementation, is it capable of being equally enforced?
Do you think a court would strike this down under the long standing void for vagueness doctrine?
Am I correct that you do still teach constitutional law when you’re not on your sabbatical?
Darren Smith: “I have to wonder if there was not some Back Channel assent from President Assad to what is happening militarily.”
My understanding is that the airstrike kills of terrorists in Yemen, Somalia, Pakistan, and now Syria have been conducted diplomatically in this way.
Although local governments have at times publicly denounced US kills on their territory, none – as far as I know – have used their standing as violated sovereigns to pursue the case against us further. As far as I know, too, Syria didn’t fire on any US aircraft, and if Assad stood down his defenses with an incursion by an ostensibly inimical US, that’s telling. Obviously, I can’t cite to anything to confirm suspected secret diplomacy other than the reports that the US “informed” Syria of the airstrikes.
Darren Smith: “I had thought of the Piracy Clauses in the constitution that could be used as being an interesting approach.
Piracy is specific to the “high seas”. The law of nations part is more apt. But also unnecessary – see next.
Darren Smith: “Yet for better or worse I believe the president has the statutory authority to initiate these actions from our legal system.”
The US has been seriously engaged on counter-terrorism with Islamic terrorists since the Reagan administration (Beirut bombing) and with the al Qaeda movement, which includes ISIS, since the Clinton administration.
Question: What legal authority did Clinton use to conduct his AQ-focused (in other words, not Taliban-focused) airstrikes and other CT activity in Afghanistan and Sudan?
Answer: PL 107-40 (2001) states as premise that “the President has authority under the Constitution to take action to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States”. In other words, counter-terror authority “under the Constitution” wasn’t issued in reaction to 9/11. For Congress, counter-terror authority was already in place for Bush’s predecessors and inherited by Bush and Obama.
A Congressional war authorization is needed to go to war with a sovereign national actor like the Taliban and Saddam. It’s not needed to confront non-state terrorists. The model cases for circumventing Congress for war against a sovereign national actor are Obama’s Libya action and Clinton’s Balkans action.
How we approach a sovereign whom we’re not at war with to attack terrorists on its territory is interesting and calls for at least practical diplomatic action, but it’s a separate issue than a war authorization. Of course, if the violated sovereign goes to war with us, then going to war with it recalls the need for a war authorization.
Darren Smith: “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.”
Yep.
Darren Smith: “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.”
Again, is anti-ISIS counter-terrorism and a ‘war’ only in the political and rhetorical senses? Or is anti-ISIS a war in the legal sense?
From a legal standpoint, I fail to see the difference with Obama’s anti-ISIS actions in Syria from Reagan’s anti-Soviet ‘Charlie Wilson’s War’ (which carried forward Carter’s anti-Soviet Afghanistan policy, fyi) and Clinton’s anti-AQ actions in Afghanistan. Except I don’t recall that Clinton “informed” the Taliban. (Maybe he did, which would help explain why Clinton’s missile strikes harmed AQ not a bit.)
If we want to take President Obama to task for abuse of war powers, the Libya intervention – which was based ostensibly on humanitarian R2P but then stretched to take down a sovereign – is the case to do it. Not anti-ISIS, as long as Syria and Iraq don’t decide to play good host like Taliban did with AQ.
Well I see that I have a mission to complete. I am pleased that Jon named David as being deleted for violation of the civility rule. That’s a start.
Darren
Perhaps I misspoke…
… Barak H. O’Cheney.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/10/17/all-in-the-family-cheney-and-obama-related/
🙂
I like the comment of Leejcarol just two up from here. I am glad that neither I nor my half blind guy for whom I give guidance at the polls never voted for either Bush. In a prior life I voted for Ike. When he left office he warned us of the Military Industrial Complex. No one in his own party listened. Those that did left his party. Kennedy got us into Nam. Bush invaded the wrong Eye country. Obama bashing is the worst I have seen. Some bashed Nixon. There was a phrase or campaign slogan back in 1972 which has resonance now:
“Don’t change Dicks in the middle of a screw. Vote for Nixon in ’72.”
For the war hawks maybe McCain will run again. I do not think that Hillary is a hawk. She is not a dove. If Hillary wins we will have her experience and the experience of her husband. Not bad. In two years we may already be in the middle of this new war in the middle east. I will always be in favor of peace. I advocate that we bar all Americans from travelling to any country in the middle east or to Nigeria or Somalia, and also Afghanistan. As to Obama I will say what many of his friends in high school said when he was in the middle of his first date: “Barry! Pull out now like your father should have!”
BarkinDog – I voted in the 1972 election and I did not hear the following.
Could it be because in 1972 George McGovern was the Democratic candidate?
If I am missing some subtle joke please explain it, because I am at a loss to make a connection here.
“but what seems to be ignored by a lot of the right wing: President Obama is the President of the US, not just of those who voted for him or those who, while disliking a number of things he has done, actions he has taken, appreciate many of the things he has done like the ACA, auto industry back, recession ended, housing rebounded as a start.”
A person who is the President of the whole United States would not be making comments that are dismissive, divisive or derogatory to those who DIDN’T vote for him. Bitter clingers?. Holder and Obama with their “my people” mindset. Pitting people against each other. Dreaming up wars on women. Wars on whatever is convenient to keep political power. Obama doesn’t respect the heartland of the Country nor the blue collar workers. He has even said that he was writing off white men.
As to your last list of accomplishments, I don’t have the time or energy to try to explain to you that the ACA is a train wreck, the American auto industry is not back. GM is in bad bad shape and I would be telling my clients to sell the stock if they hadn’t already done so. The recession is not ended the only thing keeping us from massive inflation or even hyper inflation is the gyrations of the Federal Reserve. It is a house of cards ready to fall at the next failed Treasury auction. Housing across the US has not rebounded. Only in select areas is there anything resembling a normal housing market. Construction is stalled.
Besides. These are digressions from the topic of the post, which is the President, Executive powers vs Congressional powers as it pertains to his current actions in Syria.
leej Are you kidding me??? In Madison I would hear “Bush is not my President” daily. Don’t you remember Hollywood people saying they were moving out of the US when he was reelected. They didn’t but I distinctly remember Garafolo and Alec Baldwin, maybe Sarandon? Come on, leej. I sense you got that race card in your hand and you’re thinking about playing that trump card. Am I right?
Nick – I was willing to help kickfund the ticket and help pack Baldwin’s bag but he wouldn’t leave. He talked the talked, he couldn’t walk the walk. Obama is the President, he is not ‘my’ President since I do not own him and I did not vote for him. I just hope the country survives him. I felt the same way about Jimmy “I am an anti-Semite” Carter.
Nick, it is off topioc but I will reply, I googled celebrities who said they would leave the US cause Bush President. Only found one ultra rightwing site who said Baldwin only one said would leave the US. Since Baldwin has repeatedly shown himself to be someone who has psychological issues I do not call an anecdote about one crazy person to be emblematic of wholesale He isnot my president. Just read the comments on Huckabee;s page on FB for instance. Continual he is not my president, he is a muslim, he is not American, etc etc etc.
I have never pulled the race card and it is interesting that you are pulling it by trying to ensnare me in a racist defense of the president or rationale for the hatred.
It took e a long time to accept racism is a big part of the hatred for this president but it is more then that. This country has become so polarized like I do not ever recall seeing before. We used to be revered thruout the world for the fact that, no matter how acrimonious an election, we got behind the winner and accepted the person who won as the president and legitimate holder of that office. It has to do with respect for the will of the voters and the office.
I am amazed at your vitriol in writing for I know you to be a really nice person in ‘real life”
Nick – it is not a question of too many in the service, we have plenty of places to put them. We would just reopen all the bases we closed down.
Concerning your daughter and her boyfriend relationships, I was just telling my cousin how I used to spend extra time buttering up the parents of the girls I dated so I never got static from them. They were always supportive of my dating their daughter. The daughter might not be, but the parents were. 🙂
Because I said someone giggled in New Zealand a comment was deleted. That’s adorable.
David, tell that to the female Peshmerga fighters.
Olly, I like the concept OF 2 years mandatory service after high school, but wouldn’t we have too many in the service? I see Obama gave a salute to his Marine guards w/ a coffee cup in his hand. Disrespectful. But, I give him a pass. The Secret Service say he and the entire Obama family are very respectful, genuine, and just plain nice. That goes a long way w/ me. You judge people by how they treat those who serve them. We taught our daughter, if a boyfriend is rude to a waitress, DUMP HIM.
Nick – how do you salute with a cup of coffee without spilling it on yourself?
I have deleted an exchange between David M and Anonymously Yours under our civility rule.
Thanks David I am laughing and am talking with a friend of mine in New Zealand. She is looking at the blog and giggled at what you said….thanks….
Anonymously yours, I have had to delete another comment from you under our civility rule.
Nick, Paul and DBQ,
I was interviewed by the Navy Times back in 1980 after I got to my first ship. I believed then and believe now that two years (min) of military service should be required out of high school. If anything, they will learn a little humility before heading off to college.
Paul and DBQ, The IDF is a people’s army and the Israeli’s know how to fight wars. Their reality is different than ours but their male/female everyone serves is righteous. I think I could get behind that type system here.
david – I have no problem with the fine women who already serve in the armed forces. However, I think all men and women should serve if there is to be a draft. The draft should be universal and be for at least 3 years active service.
One of the problems with Vietnam was that it was draftees who ended up there because they were short-timers. Enlistees had three years so most of them got assignments elsewhere or more training, schools, etc. This way, everybody has the same chance of being a target.
I agree Paul!
Women and men should be both drafted if we get to that situation. While I don’t think that all women should be put into combat situations…..and neither should all men……because men and women are just not interchangeable (physically or mentally), I think that there are many valuable positions that can be filled by putting the person (be it male or female) into the job that suits them best. [ As an aside, during the Vietnam War (1968), I was heavily requited by the Air Force as the scores on some tests I took indicated that I should be an aviation navigator. I was all ready to join and pretty excited about it too, and then they found out that I am a woman and took back their offer.]
With our high-tech and computerized military, perhaps women “can” and should take a more active combat role. I would leave THAT issue up the the military commanders as they know best and keep the social engineers out of it.
While we are at it….I’m also in favor of bringing back something like the Civilian Conservation Corps. Get those idle young men and women off of the streets. Get them to do something productive. Learn a trade. Earn their keep!!!!!
Annie,
If you’ll notice nothing was said about you warning LeeJ not to fall for the baiting. How’s that sit with you?
Annie,
Not at least with what I have been able to learn about these parties. Just gotta remember there is no fundamental right to marry stated in the constitution. It was loosely interpreted. Kinda like that, civility is a concept, not in the constitution. So it’s whatever Jon wants it to be.
AY wrote: “… civility is a concept, not in the constitution. So it’s whatever Jon wants it to be.”
Civility is not that hard to understand.
From the Institute for Civility in Government:
Civility is about more than just politeness, although politeness is a necessary first step. It is about disagreeing without disrespect, seeking common ground as a starting point for dialogue about differences, listening past one’s preconceptions, and teaching others to do the same. Civility is the hard work of staying present even with those with whom we have deep-rooted and fierce disagreements. It is political in the sense that it is a necessary prerequisite for civic action. But it is political, too, in the sense that it is about negotiating interpersonal power such that everyone’s voice is heard, and nobody’s is ignored.
And civility begins with us.
—–
http://www.instituteforcivility.org/who-we-are/what-is-civility/