Monday, December 26, 2005

Iraq: A case study in ongoing federal usurpation

The Iraq conflict within a few months will enter its fourth year, and the discussion on both sides is so lacking in clarity that Macbeth could aptly describe it: "A tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing". If the constitution, however seriously flawed, is the only check on federal encroachments on our liberty, then all federal policy and action must be held to a rigorous constitutional test. And by constitution, I mean the pre-14th amendment constitution, since that amendment so unbalanced the powers between the state and federal governments that it has been a major factor in our current problems. But there is a further test. The policy adopted should be wise. Wise in the sense that it enhances, or at least does not diminish, the rights to liberty, life, and property, of Americans. For example, it would be constitutional for Congress to declare war on Canada, but this would be unwise and contrary to enhancing the well-being of Americans, much less Canadians. So how does the Iraq conflict measure up to this test? We must understand the current Iraq conflict as a continuation of the confict of 1990 -1991. Saddam was a brutal dictator and he invaded and occupied Kuwait. Bush the first soon announced "This will not stand". But the crucial question was not asked, and that is: Under what authority would Bush the first be able to enforce his position and go to war against Iraq to expel it from Kuwait? In order to do so, Congress should have declared war, but in the extra-constitutional practice of the last 55 years, Congress authorized Bush, like a Caesar, to take to the field at his own discretion, in the absence of a declaration of war. This abdication by Congress is part of a general trend in government of declining accountability with increasing power. Thus, Persian Gulf War I was an unconstitutional invasion of a country that was not threatening the United States, under an abstract principle of stopping foreign dictators at Presidential discretion. There is also no constitutional provision for removing foreign dictators, no matter how egregious they may be, in the absence of a declaration of war. The outcome of this intervention was to convert Iraq from a neutral seller of oil to an enemy we had to monitor at great expense for the next 12 years, before going to war again. Governments count on their subjects having short memories. We supported Saddam in the Iran - Iraq war, but in Orwellian fashion, the friends of former decades become the current enemies. After 9/11, Saddam's supposed store of weapons of mass destruction became the reason for a second war. This war clearly was initiated on a flawed premise, but we will never be able to know whether, based on the classified information at hand, Saddam was clearly a threat. Nevertheless, Gulf War II is unconstitutional for the same reason Gulf War I was, a lack of a declaration of war. However, for point of argument, let us ask even if the war met its stated justification and was declared, what should be the limit of Presidential authority? Does authority extend to reconstructing a foreign country in our image once the enemy has been defeated? This is a nebulous area...but if it is not truly vital to removing the threat, I would argue it is an unconstitutional use of federal resources in a kind of foreign social engineering. Defending freedom at home should mean a judicious use of deterrence and force to quell actual threats. Interfering in the domestic institutions of another land will produce enmity which will have to be dealt with in future years, with further expense and reductions in liberty for Americans. The neo-conservative vision of remaking Arab dictatorships fails both tests. It is neither constitutionally authorized, nor is it wise in terms of promoting the liberty and prosperity of Americans. The federal government has no other legitimate responsibilities.

6 Comments:

Anonymous Cassville said...

I'm interested in anything to do with the Civil War and with Cassville, Georgia. Your blog is interesting.

Regards,

A Cassville Heritage Association member, Cassville, Georgia
Cassville

1:11 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

best regards, nice info consumer report sony digital cameras Hot mom in tub celexa quitting Public health syndromic surveillance system orlando paintball

9:56 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

best regards, nice info Local person having group sex Asian teen pics Brother sex porn Retirement saving plan Singapore registrar of companies Strap-on sex toys kashwere furniture kevin covais penis feeling like penis is dripping bextra attorney washington Shemale fucks pussy cobra trap shooter radar detector ice machine parts accessories Cheap calling card from zealand comfort strap penis Pontiac sunfire 1996 gt 12f4 mile Pop up blocker free download 2005

9:40 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Enjoyed a lot! Jones awning http://www.confederate-coat-color.info/Ccm-hockey-sweaters.html http://www.pro-evolution-soccer-4-torrent.info/whatisthedrugneurontin.html buy ambien online Cialis for sales When was ritalin founded yourself moen faucet repair Kitchenaid quiet scrub dishwasher kudj230y3 Big free movie porn Ferrari enzo w12 Email marketing debt-freedom.biznewdebt.html Battery operated dinosaur breeze humidifiers jeep accessory stores waynesburg ohio Cheap access numbers for international calls from england southern california laser eye surgery digital print ru www ambien com linkdomain e anbien online http://www.taxhelp0.info/Wellsfargo-401k.html

12:35 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Looking for information and found it at this great site... film editing schools

4:44 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

confederategold.blogspot.com is very informative. The article is very professionally written. I enjoy reading confederategold.blogspot.com every day.
bad credit loans
payday loans canada

6:08 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home