-Caveat Lector- WJPBR Email News List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Peace at any cost is a Prelude to War!
But the president, in any case, conspicuously declined to request a declaration of war from Congress. Some observers have claimed that since only a scant handful of Muslim states recognized the Taliban junta, it was illegitimate - and thus not a proper target of a declaration of war. But President Bush treated the Taliban as the legitimate governing authority when he demanded its cooperation in arresting and extraditing terrorists. If the Taliban was a suitable subject for a presidential ultimatum, it was just as suitable a target for a congressional declaration of war. Under the "law of nations" as understood by the Founding Fathers, declarations of war are intended to put both governments and their subjects on notice of impending hostilities. Reflecting the recognized international conventions at the time of the American founding, Emmerich de Vattel pointed out in his definitive work The Law of Nations that issuing a declaration of war is a duty owed "to humanity, and especially to the lives and peace of the subjects" of the hostile government. By issuing such a declaration, the aggrieved nation formally notifies "that unjust nation, or its chief, that we are at length going to have recourse to the last remedy, for the purpose of bringing him to reason." Vattel also emphasized that where "custom has introduced certain formalities in the business" of declaring war, those formalities must be dutifully observed, unless they have been "set … aside by a public renunciation." In the case of the United States of America, the "formalities" in question are specifically defined not by custom, but by the Constitution - which has not been amended to relieve the president of his duty to seek a formal declaration from Congress. Congressional Abdication Prior to the president's September 20, 2001 address, Congress passed a joint resolution authorizing the president "to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, or aided the terrorist attacks on September 11." (Emphasis added.) As commentator Sheldon Richman observes, that resolution was not a declaration of war, but "a grant of Caesarian power." When asked if the president would have to obtain congressional authorization to attack nations other than Afghanistan, Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) replied: "No, he certainly wouldn't have to clear it with us. He's an independent branch of government." Daschle's reply misrepresents the Constitution's division of war powers between the executive and legislative branches. In our constitutional system, the president does not have the privilege of committing our nation to war; only Congress has the power to make that decision. The description of the president as "commander in chief" of our military describes a function, not an office. In peacetime, this presidential role insures civilian control of our military. But even in wartime, the president exercises his role under a mandate from Congress, and subject to its budgetary and regulatory restraints. In carrying out the functions of commander in chief, wrote Alexander Hamilton in The Federalist, No. 69, the president's authority "would be nominally the same with that of the king of Great Britain, but in substance much inferior to it. It would amount to nothing more than the supreme command and direction of the military and naval forces … while that of the British king extends to the raising and regulating of fleets and armies, all which, by the Constitution … appertain to the legislature." In a June 1793 essay written as the infant American republic confronted the prospect of a war with Britain, Hamilton re-emphasized the primacy of Congress' role in committing our nation to war: "It is the province and duty of the Executive to preserve to the Nation the blessings of peace. The Legislature alone can interrupt those blessings, by placing the Nation in a state of War." Notably, Hamilton was an outspoken proponent of "energy in the executive." But like the other Framers of the Constitution, he insisted that the president should devote his energies to carrying out the constitutionally sound measures passed by Congress - including declarations of war. War Without End? In a 1798 letter to Thomas Jefferson, James Madison pointed out: "The Constitution supposes, what the history of all governments demonstrates, that the executive is the branch of power most interested in war, and most prone to it. It has accordingly with studied care, vested the question of war in the legislature." Allowing the executive to decide unilaterally "the question of war" would be tantamount to installing a monarchy - and potentially set the stage for "continual warfare," a condition in which liberty cannot long survive. The Bush administration has eagerly acted upon Congress' open-ended grant of power. In early January, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld warned that 15 countries are potential targets of U.S. military strikes. Rumsfeld has also advised that the "war on terror" might last for more than a single lifetime, and Bush administration strategists have reportedly been reviewing contingency plans for a conflict lasting 50 years or more. By abdicating its constitutional war powers, Congress violated a key tenet of the Just War doctrine. President Bush committed an even more grievous violation by ignoring Congress and deferring to the supposed authority of the UN Security Council to authorize his decision to take our nation to war. "We are supported by the collective will of the world.... [T]he world has come together to fight a new and different war," insisted the president in the White House report The Global War on Terrorism: The First 100 Days. In a similar vein, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan has stated with satisfaction that by presiding over the global "war on terrorism," the world body is providing "collective global defense against a global enemy." By doing so, the UN is rapidly gaining both the power and the pretense of legitimacy it needs to become the seat of a socialist World State. In addition, our nation's unwise involvement in a UN-directed "anti-terrorism" coalition has made us allies with some of the world's most notorious terrorist states. Syria, a chief exporter of terrorism, presently sits on the UN Security Council, where it helps preside over the "war on terrorism." Until the president described it as part of the "axis of evil," Iran was also a member of the UN-directed coalition. Iran is a patron of Osama bin Laden, and a surrogate of Russia - itself a permanent member of the UN Security Council. Communist China, another permanent Security Council member, generously supplied military hardware and assistance to Afghanistan's Taliban junta. And the Northern Alliance, brought to power with the backing of the UN-organized coalition, is a hideous collection of terrorists, drug traffickers, and degenerates that differs from the Taliban only in matters of nuance. How can a "war on terrorism" in which terrorists are our comrades-in-arms be considered just? The primary stated objective of the war on Afghanistan was to get Osama bin Laden. Yet when bin Laden and his chief lieutenant, Mullah Omar, eluded capture, the coalition declared victory because the Northern Alliance had supplanted the Taliban. In addition, the president has warned that tens of thousands of bin Laden's terrorists have fled Afghanistan and pose a continuing threat to our nation. Given all of this, it would appear that the war on Afghanistan fails the test of proportionality. The costs of perpetual war, as measured in lives, liberties, wealth, and national independence, also appear to violate the Just War principle of proportionality. The same principle requires exploring alternatives to warfare. The only realistic alternative to an interminable "war on terrorism" is to repudiate our present interventionist foreign policy and restore the Founding Fathers' policy of enlightened neutrality. That policy would dictate non-intervention in the affairs of other nations coupled with maintaining a military geared exclusively toward national defense. It would require that Congress re-claim its constitutional role as the sole body with the power to commit our nation to war. And, most importantly, it would demand that our nation liberate itself from the United Nations - which, far from being the world's "last, best hope for peace," is becoming an engine for perpetual war. *COPYRIGHT NOTICE** In accordance with Title 17 U. S. C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for nonprofit research and educational purposes only.[Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ] Want to be on our lists? Write at [EMAIL PROTECTED] for a menu of our lists! Write to same address to be off lists! <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
