If you have time, Mr. President, Senator Paul can help you learn the Constitution means what it says

undefined

“While we all condemn the atrocities in Syria, the United States was not attacked. The President needs congressional authorization for military action as required by the Constitution, and I call on him to come to Congress for a proper debate. Our prior interventions in this region have done nothing to make us safer, and Syria will be no different.” Senator Rand Paul, (R-Kentucky), 7 April 2017

 

A central concern of the Founding generation, when writing the Constitution, was to ensure that no one man, or one man and his clique, could take the republic to war. To that end, the Constitution delegates the citizenry’s power to declare war solely to its servants in Congress, and, in doing so, uses language that makes it clear that the Congress cannot delegate this power to the executive branch of the government. The ability of a president to order military action was — and is — tightly limited to instances in which the United States is attacked or, perhaps, if a clear threat must be preempted.

-----------------------------------------------------
It is my sincere desire to provide readers of this site with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can't do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. [Burning Platform LLC - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal

-----------------------------------------------------
To donate via Stripe, click here.
-----------------------------------------------------
Use promo code ILMF2, and save up to 66% on all MyPillow purchases. (The Burning Platform benefits when you use this promo code.)

Since 1955, however, every president and every Congress have acted in clear and deliberate violation of the Constitution’s allocation of war-making powers. In 1955, the Congress passed a resolution — called  an “Authorization for the Use of Military Force” (AUMF)  — that allowed President Eisenhower to do what he wanted, when he wanted to do it, with U.S. military forces in the defense of Formosa (Taiwan) against Mao’s China. Later, the Vietnam war began with another AUMF, and every other U.S. war since Vietnam has started with one, save for those which the president started off his own hook — the Obama/Clinton Libyan war, for example, — without even bothering to seek an unconstitutional delegation of the war-making power from Congress.Your 6 April 2017 attack on a Syrian military airfield/chemical-storage depot, Mr. President, is the latest example of this unconstitutional war-making. The barrage of 60 cruise missiles — worth about $5.5 billion — was, as usual for the U.S. military, a feckless exercise in concrete-smashing. As in Bill Clinton’s Serbia war, the national government attacked a state that had not harmed the United States, and in which the republic has no genuine national interests at stake. All of this was done via the decision and then orders of one man — advised by his unelected advisers — for the U.S. military to conduct an unconstitutional act of offensive war, as if the republic is an absolute and so lawless monarchy.

President Trump, was your pledge to install a commonsense, non-interventionist and  America First foreign policy just lying words? I trusted that they were not, but now I wonder. You appear to have been genuinely shaken by the chemical attacks and the deaths that resulted therefrom. Yes, Mr. Trump, war is tough and bloody, and people of all ages get killed, just ask some Gold Star families. But if you truly launched 60 cruise missiles because you were overcome by your personal emotions after seeing the results of the chemical attack, your temperament is worrisome. Indeed, if you attacked because you felt bad about the deaths in Syria, you created a situation in which the Founders’ genius has never been on better display than in their creation of a document that tried to make sure that no single distraught individual could use the republic’s military power to seek revenge for his personal pain.

What have you and the pro-war Americans gained from the attacks, Mr. Trump? Are you and they enjoying soothed sensitivities and weeping less? Well, good on you and them. Other than some smashed-up military facilities, a handful of dead Syrians, and 20 or so destroyed Syrian aircraft, you, your generals, and advisers achieved only a disgrace.

–You ignored constitutional requirements and you attacked a state that did not threaten the republic. These are two distinct and self-inflicted defeats for the rule of law.

–You probably will see the Russians and the Iranians station additional aircraft squadrons of their own in Syria, and more sophisticated anti-aircraft systems, to replace Syrian losses and issue a silent challenge to you to come after them.

–You have certainly focused Syrian and Iranian irregular forces in the Syria and Iraq on the task of killing U.S. Marines and soldiers in response.

–You followed the attack by placing more sanctions on Syria, which appears to mean that, as in Iraq under Clinton and Bush, the killing of civilians  — including kids like those you got all weepy over — by starvation and the lack of medical care is, as Albright said, “worth it”.

So as not to be entirely negative, Mr. Trump, there is some praise flowing in for your attack. The NATO leaders who refuse to defend themselves, and want America to do so and pay for the privilege, have given you a collective thumps up. The Arab tyrants who oppress their peoples, and fund al-Qaeda and the Islamic State, think you are swell. And just look at the hurrahs coming from Israel’s leader, who graciously took time out from extorting U.S.taxpayer money from the congressmen and senators he has suborned to send his congratulations. Needless to say, the leaders of ISIS and al-Qaeda also have sent you their hearty thanks.

Finally, I hope you can revel in the widespread praise of those who are more loyal to Israel and endless war than they are to the United States, and who did all they could to elect Clinton, defame your family, and slander you. The praise of disloyal, Neocon, and interventionist U.S. citizens like John McCain, Bill Kristol and his Weekly Standard, Lindsey Graham, and Marco Rubio, whose speech on FOX this morning must have been written by AIPAC, emanate from men who hate your guts and will never stop seeking to destroy you. Their praise is not even worth what John Nance Garner once described as a “bucket of warm spit.”

You said, Mr. President, that you only wanted to be America’s president, and not the president of the world. Well the only way to be the former is to obey the constitution, and the only way to be the latter is evade it, so as to become the world’s self-funding policeman who gets the title of “Leader of the Free World”, which means you get to bleed the United States white by fighting other peoples’ wars. That title would be sought only by a Globalist, never by an American nationalist.

Your attack on Syria — like the attacks of all your post-1945 predecessors — evaded the constitution, and so damaged the republic by undermining the rule of law. The achievements that the attack achieved are, at best, paltry, Islamist-assisting, and unconscionably expensive. The applause you have won for attacking is both a plague sent by your and the republic’s enemies, and a nightmare for your supporters and advocates.

Surely you must remember the latter, Mr. Trump, they are the people who elected you because they believed you meant what you said about putting America First. Perhaps they were wrong.

Reprinted with permission from Non-Intervention.com.

 

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
16 Comments
starfcker
starfcker
April 10, 2017 6:29 am

Israel hater scheuer sure ain’good at maff. The cruise missles Trump lit off cost less than a million bucks apiece. The newest model costs 1.4 million. All the cruise missles we own are worth about two and a half billion. Get a real job, sheuer.

Ed
Ed
  starfcker
April 10, 2017 9:57 am

Meh, so he didn’t know what the missiles cost. If they were $2 a dozen, Trump would still have fucked up by launching even one of them. I get that you’re a dyed-in-the-wool Trumpeteer, but that was a lame comment even by the standard you usually set for yourself.

Anonymous
Anonymous
  Ed
April 10, 2017 10:05 am

Whether he “fucked up” or not remains to be seen.

Let’s see how this plays out before we decide about that.

Anonymous
Anonymous
  Anonymous
April 10, 2017 10:57 pm

Personally, anything that goes against the Constitution and its limits on power is “fucking up” as far as I’m concerned.

Yes, Trump fucked up. But like the proverbial tree falling in the woods, if everyone thinks he did a good job and is willing to bypass the Constitution, it’s okay, right?

Not for me. He took the oath.

kokoda - the most deplorable
kokoda - the most deplorable
April 10, 2017 7:23 am

Gets +++++’s from me.

Anonymous
Anonymous
April 10, 2017 8:51 am

” The President needs congressional authorization for military action as required by the Constitution……….”

If this were actually true, and enemy attack on Congress that killed all of them would leave the President with no authority but to sign surrender papers since he couldn’t take any military action.

The President has broad powers to use the Military in limited actions, the War Powers Act is what should be being discussed here if anything is being discussed regarding the legality of it.

FWIW, we’re already involved in the region, even Syria, in ongoing military actions that started under Obama who used the involvement that started under Bush as the basis for them.

Ed
Ed
  Anonymous
April 10, 2017 9:58 am

Pick a name, or STFU, you fucking neocon shill.

Anonymous
Anonymous
  Ed
April 10, 2017 10:07 am

Anything to say about the subject of the post?

overthecliff
overthecliff
April 10, 2017 9:01 am

I’m confused. Why would anyone down vote Stars comment? Ohhh, now I get it . It is Israel not the cost of missles.

kokoda - the most deplorable
kokoda - the most deplorable
  overthecliff
April 10, 2017 9:58 am

cliff….star makes a BIG deal about a $$$ amount that is Obviously in error. We have all made similar mistakes, including Admin. Just my opinion.

Note: I didn’t vote.

Anonymous
Anonymous
  kokoda - the most deplorable
April 10, 2017 10:09 am

Hope you’re happy with what you got by not voting.

CCRider
CCRider
April 10, 2017 9:39 am

Scheuer is an American hero. He’s been preaching the constitution for decades as well as calling out Israel’s death grip over the American political process and popping NeoRat lying bromides in his spare time. His problem is that he actually thinks the constitution is a relevant force anymore. It ain’t. It’s a dead letter and has been so for at least a hundred years.

I read, but have not authenticated that only 23 of the 59 missiles found their target. Can that be confirmed by anyone? If so I imagine the military used up old ordinance so they can buy new ones. What the hell, why not when money and human life is no object. It may also tell us that the U.S. military is a paper target. Did Russian counter measures defeat them? Interesting thought. It makes no sense that adversaries would trade punch for punch on ‘our’ military’s terms. My guess is that non symmetrical warfare, warfare of a much different sort would make much more sense. Find alternative measures that render all of the enemy’s military’s equipment obsolete. The U.S. has been fighting defenseless countries for decades. That hardly builds muscle. Except in the skull.

kokoda - the most deplorable
kokoda - the most deplorable
  CCRider
April 10, 2017 9:54 am

Trump Humilated: Syria Shoots Down 34 of 59 Cruise Missiles, Russia to Upgrade System Soon

Anonymous
Anonymous
  kokoda - the most deplorable
April 10, 2017 10:14 am

Why would that humiliate Trump?

It would seem to be what Obama left him to work with, if anything it should be a humiliation on his legacy.

Maybe the reason he fired so many (actually it would be the military experts that recommended it, I think) was because he knew of their vulnerability and wanted to show Russia not only that he could overcome their defenses but that it was going to take everything they have plus some to stop us.

But it’s just all speculation to anyone not in the position to actually know what and why.

CCRider
CCRider
  Anonymous
April 10, 2017 11:06 am

I couldn’t care less if it embarrasses Trump, nor implicates Obama. My point is that 1) Michael Scheuer is a hero and 2) If more than half your ‘smart’ weapons fail at shooting ducks off a fence then that may indicate vulnerability. Maybe we’re not as exceptional as we’d like to believe.

Anon
Anon
April 10, 2017 10:30 am

Agree with the War Powers Act comment above. That should be the discussion. It does remain to be seen what Trump has up his sleeve. I am not passing judgement yet.
Rand Paul is no authority on anything. He is a shill. I lost all respect for that man when he attempted to ram through a “health care” provision that would allow medical “providers” (scammers) to have full immunity from antitrust laws. Ever since then, if I see anything including Rand Paul’s name, I figure it is a lie or distraction to have you look to the shiny object while someone attempts a rear entry in to your liberty or wallet.