Obarfo gets his authority through the READ process:  Rectal Extraction and
Anal Deduction.

http://www.absoluterights.com/where-is-obamas-authority-to-strike-syria/****

** **

*Where is Obama's authority to strike Syria?***

Jon Dougherty****

[image:
http://www.absoluterights.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/tomahawk-cruise-missle-from-ship-300x336.jpg]
****

If news reports are to be believed - and so far, there is no reason
*not*to believe them - the Syrian army deployed chemical weapons
against rebels
and civilians alike in a recent attack. The use of chemical weapons in
warfare is a major violation of international law, but is it up to America
to unilaterally enforce it?****

According to the Obama White House, the answer is a resounding "yes." As
details of the attack continue to surface, the president has ordered the
U.S. military to prepare for a strike against Syria. And it doesn't appear
as though he plans to ask Congress for permission to launch said strikes,
as is required by the Constitution.****

>From *Voice of 
>America*:<http://www.voanews.com/content/kerry-calls-use-of-chemical-weapons-in-syria-obscene/1737364.html>
****

*U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry says Syria's government is trying to
destroy evidence of what he says is its use of chemical weapons against
civilian targets near the capital last week. Kerry says there "must be
accountability" for those responsible for the deaths of more than 300
people.*

*Kerry says what has happened in Syria "should shock the conscience of the
world."*

*"The indiscriminate slaughter of civilians, the killing of women and
children and innocent bystanders by chemical weapons is a moral obscenity,"
he said. "By any standard it is inexcusable. And despite the excuses and
equivocations that some have manufactured, it is undeniable."*

*Kerry says President Obama is in close touch with allies, discussions that
raise the prospect of military action. He says Obama "will be making an
informed decision about how to respond to this indiscriminate use of
chemical weapons." The United States has not ruled out any military options
except for U.S. troops on the ground in Syria.*

*"Make no mistake. President Obama believes there must be accountability
for those who would use the world's most heinous weapons against the
world's most vulnerable people," he said. "Nothing today is more serious
and nothing is receiving more serious scrutiny."*

We agree that the use of chemical weapons on civilians is a horrendous
thing that violates international law - maybe even horrendous enough the
president likely would not have much difficulty in securing a majority in
Congress to authorize military action. So why doesn't this former
"constitutional law professor" feel compelled to seek congressional
authority?****

And what's more, why don't members of Congress feel compelled to demand he
do so?****

Granted, we understand there is such a thing as a War Powers
Resolution<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/chapter-33>,
and that it authorizes the president to deploy U.S. troops in combat for 60
days before requiring additional congressional approval. But such
deployments were supposed to occur only within the context of protecting
vital U.S. national security interests. And thus far, the Obama
administration has yet to explain to the American people what the *vital
U.S. national security interest* is in a Syrian civil war.****

We also understand that the United States is a
signatory<http://www.opcw.org/about-opcw/member-states/>to
international treaties and conventions prohibiting the use of chemical
weapons. One of them is the Convention to Ban Chemical Weapons; the U.S.
signed onto that agreement and entered it into force April 29, 1997. While
the agreement created an "enforcement" mechanism within called the
Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, this body only has
the power to issue *sanctions* after violations of chemical weapons use; it
*does not* have the authority to authorize military force (nor should it).**
**

Finally, the U.S. is, of course, a member of the United Nations, and the 1925
Geneva Protocols
<http://www.opcw.org/chemical-weapons-convention/preamble/>did indeed
ban the use of chemical weapons. But the UN Security Council is
that body's enforcement arm and can indeed authorize military force, but it
has yet to do so. What's more, according to reports, the Obama
administration appears prepared to bypass the UN Security Council
altogether<http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23845800>,
most likely because Russia and China, permanent council members with veto
power over any of the council's decisions, are opposed to U.S. intervention
in Syria.****

So, where is the administration's authority to launch strikes against a
sovereign nation, regardless of the circumstances?****

The only justification that the administration has given to thus far to
justify intervening in Syria is "humanitarian grounds." A pink-tied Kerry
says our consciences should be shocked.****

While the American people may just be sufficiently shocked at what has
happened in Syria and decide it is a cause worthy of sacrificing some blood
and treasure (which, so far, does not look even remotely
likely<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/08/26/new-poll-syria-intervention-even-less-popular-than-congress/>),
the president *still* has a constitutional obligation to seek authority
from the people's representatives in Congress before committing U.S. forces
there.****

Will he? And if not, is this Congress prepared to hold him to account?****

** **


__._,_.___






__,_._,___

-- 
-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

<<image001.jpg>>

Reply via email to