Home | About | Donate

Senate Proposal To Constrain Trump’s War Making Would Actually Expand Perpetual War


#1

Senate Proposal To Constrain Trump’s War Making Would Actually Expand Perpetual War

Kevin Gosztola

A new authorization for the use of military force proposed by Democratic and Republican senators would further entrench the United States in endless war. It would also streamline the ability of President Donald Trump and future presidents to expand the “war on terrorism” to additional countries and broaden a list of “associated forces” that are “co-belligerents” of al-Qaida, the Taliban, or the Islamic State.


#2

From the article:

“‘If we detect any of the groups having any activity in any country, the president can go to war there. He just has to submit a notice saying, hey guys, we’re now at war in a new country. And that to me is not a limitation. It’s an expansion of war making, and I think, a huge mistake,’ Paul concluded."

Not there, nor anywhere else, did I see any mention of the sovereignty of “any country.” Is “any country” supposed to happily acquiesce, or at least remain passive, as the world’s most expensive military starts killing people and breaking things on its turf? The first thing that occured to me was that Twitler will, as soon as this bill passes into law, announce a finding of “terrorist activity” in Cuba, Venezuela, Iran and/or North Korea.

That Senator Paul fails to address the issue of sovereignty, while speaking against the bill on what seem to be principled grounds, doesn’t bode well.


#3

Absolutely agree, that can cause war. Do you want it? I am not


#4

An assessment by Dmitri Orlov:

Though I largely agree I would like to add this quotation from the last line of the first comment which I encourage you to read as well.

“As an American I can tell the Russians, the Chinese, the whole world, that the United States, the biggest gun crazy on the planet, will not go quietly.”

Peace
Po


#5

Wall Street and the best Congress money can buy continues to add lanes to the eternal war superhighway.


#6

I don’t see how this bill can possibly “expand” any U.S. president’s ability to wreak the continuing permanent War Against the World on Behalf of Capitalism that has been going on since the end of WW2.

Every post-WW2 president has ignored the principle of national sovereignty and waged relentless wars hiding behind executive orders, unstated reasons of “national security,” false flag attacks, “coalitions” of the intimidated and co-opted, the United Nations, etc.

It is impossible to expand on unlimited. The U.S. is now a permanent warrior state whose main purpose is to protect and expand the hegemony of global capitalism.

The rest, like this debate about the new and “improved” AUMF, is white noise.

Note: For Details See The Empire Report by William Blum as a starting place, though the documentation on the U.S. permanent wars against the world is massive and indisputable - especially by the billions of human beings and Grandmother Earth who suffer and have suffered from them.


#7

We saw with the Pompus Mike nomination to State Dept that Rand Paul’s expressed opposition to anything is essentially meaningless.


#8

William Blum has produced some excellent work on how the United States has advanced empire by meddling in countries and waging wars, which have destabilized populations and produced colonial results. My piece by no means is intended to obscure this reality.

However, the “white noise” you dismissively reference does matter. It is important to pay attention to the specific ways in which Democrats and Republicans are collaborating to expand the imperial presidency.

Yes, it has existed to some extent for the past decades, but as a journalist, it does me no good to sit back and say, “Well, this is the way it has been and the way it always will be,” and resign myself to certain realities to discourage myself from pursuing a story.

There always is urgency to developments that demand public attention, whether there are examples in past history to suggest this is all part of an abysmal pattern.


#9

Glad to see my Sen. Jeff Merkley speak out on this.
As we saw with the false flag operation (imo) in Syria recently, the U. N. Inspectors were slow walked to the incident’s supposed site. The POTUS had no such restrictions, and luckily for many millions, played MENA Kabuki with the parties involved. That’s probably the exception to the general rule of America’s new found love affair with " fire, aim, ready " gunboat diplomacy.
We are already covertly involved in places like the Philippines and Sub-Saharan Africa. We don’t need more quagmires and blowback, thank you very much, Congress.
This So-called Great Game is getting very old and very lame. Since we can’t predict its outcome, what it’s doing to the world, and our 99’s, is really a crying shame.
Endless War elsewhere is bound to come home. And, that won’t be pretty at all.


#10

Thanks for taking the time to respond.

Of course there is urgency to all of this, but if we can’t accurately describe the social and historical contexts of political-economic behaviors, we can’t actually deal with them clearly, no matter the urgency that we feel - no matter the need for massive change as soon as possible.

The vast majority of the U.S. public is absolutely ignorant of its own complex national history and and its relationship to the political-economy of capitalism. nor does it seem to care much.

This does not mean that all pieces of journalism have to be long historical or sociological monographs. It does mean that journalists need to be aware of the environment that they work in and to do what they can to inform their audiences of that environment, if they are going to suggest ways to change it.

The proof that they are not doing it is that the proposed AUMF is a codification of the standard practice of every president and government since the end of WW2. U.S. governance has not changed much, except it is getting worse.

If we honestly want to change governmental behaviors, then clearly we must write and do things differently. I don’t think stating that is dismissive of the intensity of the current horrors that we try to navigate.


#11

“It does mean that journalists need to be aware of the environment that they work in and to do what they can to inform their audiences of that environment, if they are going to suggest ways to change it.”

Do you think I am not aware? Or that I am not doing what I can to inform?

Please do a cursory search for anything 2018 AUMF-related. There is very little coverage right now. Nearly zero interest. I know The Intercept’s Jon Schwarz wrote about it. Marjorie Cohn wrote about it for Consortium News. Common Dreams has done some splashes on their page. But here I am trying to make sure this doesn’t totally fly under the radar.

I’ll stick to what I do. I’m confident it comes from a state of awareness that is necessary in these times.


#12

So Trump attacked Syria based on another False Flag Attack. And Congress wants to neglect there duties to declare War and hand the President more power to wage War. This is outrageous and a clear violation of the Constitution and international law.

Last week, the fact-finding mission of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) visited a site in the Damascus suburb of Douma to collect samples in connection with the alleged April 7 chemical attack.

Chief of the Main Operational Directorate of the Russian General Staff Col. Gen. Sergey Rudskoy has announced that the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) had confirmed that there were no chemical weapons found at the Barzeh research center in Damascus despite the US officials’ claims.

The official further noted that thousands of people could have died if there was any chemical weapon on the sites that were attacked by the US-led coalition.

“Immediately after the attacks, many people who worked at these destroyed facilities and just bystanders without any protective equipment visited them. None of them got poisoned with toxic agents,” Rudskoy said.


#13

Of course you’ll stick to what you do, as I will. We were having a discussion. I don’t know if it generated anything useful, but at least we had to look at stuff we do in very uncomfortable ways, which may or may not be useful.