36 149

A discussion with no political spin, please.

140613obamaIf ever there was a hot political potato, Obama’s self-made dilemma with Syria sure fits the bill! His arrogant attitude demonstrated when he personally drew a red line seemed to proclaim to the world “I’m King of the world and no individual or sovereign nation shall take action of which I disapprove”. Obviously, the world now knows he is a big mouthed idiot who simply can’t conceive that no one takes him seriously. Now, in order to show the world he does have balls he announces he will “punish” Syria. No intention of influencing the outcome of the civil war nor to destroy or take control of the chemical weapons  —  only to “punish”.

His initial intention was to take military action on his own authority but then caved to political pressure to lay it off on congress. Trust me folks, this is not, as he said, a Constitutional issue in his mind but is intended to take the heat off Obama for whatever action is taken and lay it on somebody else, namely congress. And I will promise you, he will do a magnificent job of doing so. WARNING: Conservatives, do you not see the gun’s laser target on your forehead???

The above sets the stage for a discussion that I hope will provide answers to several issues, free of political spin even though we are faced with this scenario because of politics. First it must be clearly stated that I and everyone I know has nothing less that absolute disgust for the gassing of Syrians as well as the 100,00 or so others that have died in this civil war. But, and this is a very large BUT:  by what authority does the United States have the responsibility and right to take any military action against a sovereign nation where there is NO IMMINATE SECURITY THREAT against the U. S.? Where in the Constitution is the Federal government charged or authorized to be the world’s police, enforcing morality or whatever humanitarian issue we want to pick from? Where does the Constitution grant the United Nations the right and responsibility of directing our military actions or our international policies?

As far as Constitutional authority to commit our armed forces to international action, you will get any viewpoint you want just buy asking the right politician or pundit. I have even heard it said that Congress only has the right to “declare” war but the President has the right to “make” war and that making war does not require a “declaration of war”.  I always believed that our military took their orders from a civilian government but never in my wildest dreams did I ever believe that one man could do anything, anytime, anyplace with no authority of Congress required. I suppose that when I went to school over a half century ago our teachers just simply had no knowledge on our Constitution.

Lastly, if the Muslim nations want “democracy” why are there only a couple of “almost” democracies in the mid-east? Do we really believe that we can give or force it on them? If so, by what authority and how many wars will it take? Somehow I feel Sarah Palin got it right when she spoke these politically incorrect words of wisdom “there are two factions killing each other, each shouting “Allah Akbar” at each other. Why not just let Allah sort it out?”

You might also like