As a reminder, let us consider Article One, Section Eight of the Constitution. It states: “Congress shall have power to… declare War,” not the president. As an example of how far we’ve wandered from the original intent of the framers, Doe v. Bush decided that congressional authorization suffices for declaration. The last constitutionally valid declaration of war occurred in December 8, 1941, when Franklin D. Roosevelt signed a declaration of war against Japan following the attack on Pearl Harbor. All wars since have been unconstitutional. infowars/obama-believes-following-constitution-counterproductive-to-syria-attack-plan/ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Defense Secretary Panetta tells Senator Sessions that military gets its authority from UN or NATO. youtube/watch?v=ovuWJQrwpIw ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ To Chain the Dogs of War Earlier this year, we learned that Obama was planning a backdoor, clandestine chemical attack on the Syrian public in order to blame Assad as a pretense for a US military invasion. Now, we read today, as predicted in January, that Assad is being blamed for a chemical attack on his people. As if following the pre-scripted lines to a Greek tragedy, Obama has ordered naval ships loaded with cruise missiles to move within range of Syria in preparation for war. The Founding Fathers well understood the dangers that war presents to the safety of the American people. As such, they built a Constitutional framework to best protect against the inherent dangers of war. Jay explains that the governmental structure erected by the Constitution is the best safeguard for “the people of America against dangers from Foreign force” as it keeps our government officials from giving foreign nations any “pretended” or “just causes of war”. Jay, Federalist Papers Letter 4. “But not only fewer just causes of war will be given by the national government, but it will also be more in their power to accommodate and settle them amicably.” Jay, Federalist Papers Letter 3. The “just causes of war”, Jay explains, are two-fold: First, war will arise from a “violation of Treaties” (i.e., international law); and Second, “from direct violence” (i.e., killing the citizens of another sovereign nation). Jay, Federalist Papers Letter 3. The Constitution placed the power to declare war solely in the hands of the Congress: “The Congress shall have Power . . . To declare War.” US CONST. Art. I, §8, cl. 11. This is a very specific power that cannot be delegated nor can it be diffused into something else. Either war is declared or it is not. There is no middle ground. So-called “Police actions” and “Congressional authorization of force” is not within the purview of this power or as Madison puts it: "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined." Madison, Federalist Papers Letter 45. In another letter, Madison asks the question “for what purpose could the enumeration of powers of particular powers be inserted” if not to be specific in its meaning? Madison, Federalist Papers Letter 41. The Founding Fathers expected that the President would not be able to misuse the power of the military because of the declaration of war provision and the two-year appropriation limitation meaning that the Congress could not give the President more than two-years’ worth of money to keep up the military. This provision was to prevent establishment of a permanent military even if the Congress were stupid enough to ignore this provision: “They are not AT LIBERTY to vest in the executive department permanent funds for the support of an army, if they were even incautious enough to be willing to repose in it so improper a confidence.” Hamilton, Federalist Papers Letter 26. “The people of America,” Hamilton admitted, “may be said to have derived an hereditary impression of danger to liberty, from standing armies in times of peace.” Hamilton, Federalist Papers Letter 26. Hamilton argued that the Constitution protected the American people from a rogue President commanding a military large enough to threaten our liberties. He recognized, however, that a conspiracy could exist that would allow the creation of such a military which Eisenhower called “the military industrial complex”: “An army, so large as seriously to menace those liberties, could only be formed by progressive augmentations; which would suppose, not merely a temporary combination between the legislature and executive, but a continued conspiracy for a series of time.” Hamilton, Federalist Papers Letter 26. In the instant case, Obama is at the command of the largest, most powerful military in the history of the world. He can move this military at will, even without Congressional authority anywhere in the world to wreak havoc. Like so many of his predecessors, he has engaged in illegal military activities that provide just causes of war for other nations. With Syria, for example, he has violated international law by “gun running” to the Syrian rebels, and he has engaged in direct violence by perpetrating a staged chemical attack against the Syrian people. Obama knows that both Russia and China have warned him that they would get involved in any US military incursion into Syria. What possible reason would Obama be willing to risk throwing the world into another World War? Obama well understands that “It is of the nature of war to increase the executive at the expense of the legislative authority.” Hamilton, Federalist Papers Letter 8. In fact, war moves government in a “progressive direction toward monarchy.” Id. The man who would be king is now doing what monarchs do best—“cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war!” (Julius Caesar Act 3, Scene 1) Once the dogs have been unleashed, you will see us move closer and closer towards a monarchy. 2016 will bring an unprecedented third term for Obama. ~ Madame Publius youtube/watch?v=ovuWJQrwpIw
Posted on: Thu, 29 Aug 2013 03:55:43 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015