Question. Why was AUMF not repealed when Barack Obama used it to execute an American Citizen and then his teenage son abroad?
Now two wrongs do not make a right and what Trump did is a war crime but that AUMF has been used ever since it was passed to commit war crimes. The passing of this law in 2002 was a crime in and of itself.
The whole US political system is criminal, committing war crimes in every administration, waging illegal wars in every administration.
Not only Congress, but the US peace movement as well, provides almost no recognition or push-back against the endless, serial, illegal US war crimes machine.
The public in general has little understanding of the ongoing, boring, day-to-day criminality and illegality of US war-making.
We cannot count on “pundits,” who are vetted before they ever get any significant on-air platform, for their subservience to the “mainstream” framework of accepting without comment or question the US legitimacy and authority to kill and bomb and sanction and destroy.
We need to educate ourselves and each other, our family friends neighbors and co-workers, about this rampant, outrageous, murderous US criminality. And we need to grow the number of people who understand it, and build a movement to fight it and turn it back.
You can’t rain on this parade. Cheers!!!
Nice. Repeal the 2002 Iraq AUMF all you want. We still have the Bethlehem Doctrine with its New Definition of Imminent, used by government’s desire to justify its extralegal actions against other state and non-state actors.
Lies, the Bethlehem Doctrine & the Illegal Murder of Soleimani
I n one of the series of blatant lies the U.S. has told to justify the assassination of Iranian Major General Qassem Soleimani, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said that Soleimani was killed because he was planning “imminent attacks” on U.S. citizens. It is a careful choice of word. Pompeo is specifically referring to the Bethlehem Doctrine of Pre-Emptive Self Defence.
Developed by Daniel Bethlehem when legal adviser to first Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government and then U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair, the Bethlehem Doctrine says states have a right of “pre-emptive self-defence” against “imminent” attack. That is something most people, and most international law experts and judges, would accept. Including me.
Senate needs to approve it first. Then Trump can veto it!
Good question. Also, why was it reauthorized December 2019?
Anyone besides me think that it is outright murder if a President uses a drone to kill someone (to say nothing of target of opportunity collateral damage to nearby innocent people)? I keep wondering why the rest of the world thinks this dystopian ‘license to kill’ is acceptable. Geeze, people what are we allowing ourselves to get used to? One human being is elected to a four year term (a temporary job!) and then has the right to kill people on his own say so? Big Brother would have been envious. And so when his term of office is over then does that person go back to the idea that murdering someone is a crime? Is this now a permanent feature of the American Presidency? Only the President of the USA can murder?
I agree with you.
And I think the rest of the world’s leaders go along with it because they want to have that “privilege” too.
Can you imagine the ruler of North Korea announcing that he also can murder anywhere in the world on his own say so? Something seems to be broken in the world. Our civilization is abandoning the limitations of international law. Murder should be murder anywhere by anybody. It just seems that we are losing respect for life or even just justice. How about a f’king trial even? I’m old fashioned that way. One person should not have the right to openly murder anyone else without it being a crime.
As flawed as “the Founders” and the Constitution were and are, this is one of the things they got right:
You can’t just kill someone, or convict someone, on your say-so. There has to be a process, a trial, with evidence, and witnesses, and an impartial jury or judge who is not directly involved, but can hear the evidence and make a public decision.
Because otherwise, you get…
In Florida we call it the “Stand Your Ground” law. It is a horrible law that excuses vigilante type justice… as long as the victim is dead and can not tell their side of the story.
And it helps if the victim is the proper color…
I don’t disagree with your assessment of that law but this is not quite the same as undoubtably this would entail considerable premeditation.
Premeditation assumes the person has that depth of thought. I am not sure Trump has that depth.
And those around him just nod, and prod him to do more. Let the temper tantrums roll…
WOW! The house has asserted its authority–twice in one year! I can’t wait to see what happens next.
Congress’s failure to follow Lee’s advice in the first place about the Afghanistan War was among the world’s biggest mistakes ever. Allowing every president since Clinton to further expand presidential authority at the expense of Congress was also a pretty big faux pas. All Congress critters take oaths to the Constitution (the real one, not Trump’s ever-changing version), and have pretty much failed to live up to that oath, right across the board, both sides of the aisle. Had Congress been fulfilling its role instead of playing pay to play with corporations and their owners, things might be very very different.
AUMF or no AUMF. It appears Trump can break any law he wants and get away with it.
Here we disagree. I don’t think Trump needed prodding. I think his ego chomped at the bit to use such extreme power. Almost reaching that murder on fifth avenue boast but close. Murder at will with no consequences. I think it was almost a given that before he left office that he wanted to wield that much power. The power of an absolute monarch to order the death of someone on his own say so.
I think we agree actually. The prodding I mention was more specific to each ones desire. Some want wealth from the MIC, some want power and control over others (many), some want a front row seat for the apocalypse.
The prodding isn’t actually needed, but since there are so many different goals, each presses for their own. Not that it wouldn’t happen otherwise, but greed makes a person impatient now that they have the perfect “tool”.
An astute observation - ‘Greed makes a person impatient’.
I think that is true. Greed always wants more and right away too. More and more and more. Always.
I think legally the Constitution only applies within US borders.