Skip to main content

View Diary: WATCH: The Case Against Drones (60 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Simplify is correct: (5+ / 0-)
    US Constitution, Article I, Section 8:

    The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

    To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

    To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

    To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

    To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

    To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

    To establish Post Offices and post Roads;

    To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

    To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

    To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;

    To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

    To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

    To provide and maintain a Navy;

    To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

    To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

    To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

    To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;--And

    To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

    Among other constitutional duties and mandates, putting Congress in charge of darn near everything means the Founding Fathers knew there would be someone who, at some time in the future, who would claim unconstitutional powers in the executive branch, is why Congress technically has more power than the president who comes and goes every four to eight years.

    ONLY Congress has the right to declare war, and only Congress can finance wars --- for a limited amount of time, you notice.

    Commander Codpiece screamed and yelled for war like a toddler having a temper tantrum and Congress was hearing from constituents and waffling because back then even a few of them knew the truth:  9/11 was a monstrous set of crimes (hijacking and multiple murders), but since the perpetrators represented only themselves and were only a disaffected group of fanatic religious nuts who became criminals (aka "ter'rists"), did NOT represent any country or any country's military, had they survived the crashes, they could only have been charged with criminal offenses, not for a war-like "attack" on the US.  NO country declared war against the US.

    The US cannot legally declare war on a criminal gang..., but that's what AUMF covered to go after the little criminal gang of men without a country hiding in the mountains in Afghanistan (their own countries didn't even want them).  Of the 19 hijackers, 15 were from Saudi Arabia, two were from the United Arab Emirates, one was from Egypt, one was from Lebanon.  [The MOST that should have happened is that international law enforcement agencies went after these criminals.]

    Note: none were from Iraq.  None were from Afghanistan.  None of the Bushistas suggested attacking Saudi Arabia in retaliation.

    Technically, we don't even really know that OBL was the primary person who planned these attacks.  I lost count of how many #2 "leaders" were killed in the illegal and unconstitutional "war."  The ones who lived to be sent to Gitmo or wherever were tortured, and everyone knows no valid confessions come from being tortured.  Those rights are covered in the US Constitution's Bill of Rights.  All the 9/11 criminals died in the crashes with their victims, remember, so egomaniac that he was, it's possible that when Dumbya said OBL planned it, OBL claimed responsibility to make himself more important to radical criminals who were then persuaded to join his Al Quada criminal ranks.  [Remember, the Bin Laden family and the Bush Crime Family had business ties to each other and the Bushes even treated Bandar like another member of the Bush family.]

    AUMF was clearly unconstitutional, and invading Afghanistan was illegal and unconstitutional, and the usurpation of authority for Dumbya and Dickie to order troops to detour and illegally and unconstitutionally invade Iraq under what Dumbya claimed was his right under AUMF (which was technically only supposed to be for the invasion of Afghanistan to hunt for OBL; however, per a "decision higher up the chain of command," when OBL was cornered at Tora Bora, "someone" gave the order to let him go).  Thereafter, Dumbya said at different news conferences that 'he never thought about OBL at all' and on another occasion (video somewhere online) he made huge jokes about looking for OBL under tablecloths and furniture.  Ugh.

    AUMF is clearly an unconstitutional authorization to carry out drone bombings now, just as it was unconstitutional to issue the AUMF in the first place (since it's Congress' duty to declare war or not).

    For that matter, a president does not even have to be asked to be Commander in Chief.  Look at that wording in the Constitution's Section II (presidential powers) again:

    US Constitution, Article II, Section 2
    Section. 2.

    The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States....

    "WHEN called into the actual Service of the United States" means he doesn't have to be asked, and CiC is not even a mandatory role for a president.  Congress is the civilian authority when it comes to the various US military forces.

    Pisses me off when Dumbya and Dickie, et alia (including Democrats), say during campaigns that we are electing a Commander in Chief.  NO, we do NOT elect a Commander in Chief!  We elect a President ... who may or may not be called to act as CiC at some point.  Commander in Chief is a military title and WE The People do NOT elect military commanders for this country.  We elect a President.  [Or, more precisely, we elect electors in the electoral college to elect a president and vice president.  We do not have a direct democracy where we elect our people directly.]

    To reiterate: Simplify is correct.  Congress unconstitutionally and illegally abdicated their war powers and their fiscal powers to finance war when they issued the AUMF to Dumbya (and, indirectly, to his puppet master, Dickie), and it was irresponsible of them to do that as well as unconstitutional.

    I'm sick of attempts to steer this nation from principles evolved in The Age of Reason to hallucinations derived from illiterate herdsmen. ~ Crashing Vor

    by NonnyO on Wed Jan 30, 2013 at 04:29:59 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Psst: diary pls (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      NonnyO

      NonnyO, I'd encourage you to diary some of this stuff. It's not like you're short on things to say (heh)!

      Government and laws are the agreement we all make to secure everyone's freedom.

      by Simplify on Wed Jan 30, 2013 at 04:57:59 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Isn't this stuff self-evident? (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Simplify, aliasalias, No Exit, Kickemout

        :-)  Thank you.  You flatter me, but you're absolutely correct about my verbosity.  I've always been a motor-mouth from the time I learned to talk - and I often write much as I talk.  :-)  It was a useful PR tool when I was young and in the working world.

        Democrats read, don't they?  The Constitution is written in elementary language, not legalese double-speak with loopholes thrown in on top of it all like modern laws.  Most things are online nowadays, so can easily be researched and comparing modern laws with what was in the Constitution is pretty simple.

        Laws are made for men of ordinary understanding and should, therefore, be construed by the ordinary rules of common sense. Their meaning is not to be sought for in metaphysical subtleties which may make anything mean everything or nothing at pleasure.
         ~ Thomas Jefferson
        Our modern legislators and leaders have strayed FAR from the mandates of the Founding Fathers.  I'm sure our first leaders wouldn't even recognize the shenanigans in modern politics as anything that came from their ideas and laws.

        I have much more expertise on other topics.

        :-)

        I'm sick of attempts to steer this nation from principles evolved in The Age of Reason to hallucinations derived from illiterate herdsmen. ~ Crashing Vor

        by NonnyO on Wed Jan 30, 2013 at 05:15:04 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Heck, (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          NonnyO

          when I go into the fridge, sometimes I can't find the food that's right in front of my face... so I'd say we all need reminding of even the self-evident things! And even those are controversial, even here. Often enough, they're revolutionary.

          History teems with instances of truth put down by persecution. If not suppressed forever, it may be thrown back for centuries. [...] Persecution has always succeeded, save where the heretics were too strong a party to be effectually persecuted. [...] The real advantage which truth has, consists in this, that when an opinion is true, it may be extinguished once, twice, or many times, but in the course of ages there will generally be found persons to rediscover it, until some one of its reappearances falls on a time when from favourable circumstances it escapes persecution until it has made such head as to withstand all subsequent attempts to suppress it.

          - John Stuart Mill, On Liberty

          (Seriously, about posting your stuff, one last nudge: copy, paste, edit, publish...)

          Government and laws are the agreement we all make to secure everyone's freedom.

          by Simplify on Wed Jan 30, 2013 at 06:26:28 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site