I wonder if Trump used air strikes to be able to claim job done, time to go home. Everyone gets to save face without a ground war.
Politics š¤” Donald Trump
- Thread starter sup42
- Start date
NZWarriors.com
From my perspective the US has broken their own laws by thos attack. This was an act of war, and only Congress can declare war. It see.s they have ignored their own intelligence agencies. One argument they bring up is Ira ian voices saying death to the US and Israel. How is that any different to what people like Ted Cruz and Lindsay Graham are saying. Iran used to be a democratic, secular state until they had the radical idea that they should benefit from their own oil.
If the price was right, 100% would.
NZWarriors.com
US president has authority for ālimited defensive strikesā. Whether this meets that definition? Beauty is in the eye of the beholder I guess.
On Trumpās Anti-Bomb Bombing Campaign
If the US really wanted to stop nuclear weapons proliferation in the Middle East, it would have long ago supported the moves to declare the region a nuclear weapon free zone, and allow the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to monitor it.
www.scoop.co.nz
NZWarriors.com
Another opinion piece on the Iran situation as it affects US politics
Tuesday will be the third anniversary of the Supreme Courtās decision in Dobbs, the case that stripped American women of their right to get an abortion. At the time, that felt like a new low in modern-day America. Since then, however, the country reelected Donald Trump to the presidency. On Saturday, Trump bombed Iran. Historians can debate whether or not it was the ārightā thing to do. But he did not go to Congress for authorization first. Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 of the Constitution gives Congress the power to declare war. But as John Bellinger III, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations explained, presidents have significant power āto order the use of military force to defend the United States and U.S. persons against actual or anticipated attacks.ā They may also do so āto advance other important national interests.ā Although it has sometimes attracted controversy, presidents from both parties have proceeded without a congressional declaration. There has never been a precise judicial determination of when the War Powers Clause of the Constitution requires Congress to act before a president can. But itās clear presidents donāt require congressional authorization for every military step they take. There are some limitations, however. In a 2016 memo, the Justice Departmentās Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) explained, āThe Presidentās power to employ military force abroad in the absence of specific prior congressional approval derives from his constitutional responsibility as Commander in Chief and Chief Executive for foreign and military affairs.ā The White House has turned to OLC for opinions on the legality of planned military actions in the past, as President Obama did in 2011 in Libya. Obama authorized the strikes to protect the lives of pro-democracy protestors only after the United Nations had signed off. Even then, he subsequently called it the worst mistake of his presidency, despite it being the āright thingā to do, because of the chaos that ensued in the country as a result. OLC opined that defensive measures designed to repel a ādirect and immediate military attackā are a basis, although not the only one, for a presidentās use of military force without congressional approval. But a āāpossible constitutionally-based limitā on such Presidential authority may exist where a planned military engagement constitutes a āwarā within the meaning of the U.S. Constitutionās Declaration of War Clause.ā So, is this a war? Itās unlikely that DOJ will stand in Trumpās way, no matter what he wants to do. Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth have carefully characterized the attack as a one-and-done exercise, not as a prolonged attack designed to create, for instance, regime change. But Trump took to Truth Social to countermand that carefully concocted image, writing, āIt's not politically correct to use the term, 'Regime Change' but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!ā That creates the appearance that Trump has plans that would require a congressional declaration of war. Bellinger explained that most presidents prefer to have congressional authorization before entering into anything sustained, or at least a previous declaration that they can rely on. There are also indications that this is not over. There is reporting that while Iranās Fordo Nuclear Site was damaged, it was not destroyed. Iran may be able to reboot over time. Iran was still able to inflict heavy damage on Israel overnight after the U.S. strikes. Itās far too early to assess how this develops. Even if Trump had the constitutional authority to act, some international lawyers are arguing the bombing violates international law. Countries have the right to act in self-defense and to take steps to protect themselves from an āimminent armed attack.ā Bellinger explained that even though āThe United States has taken a broad view of āimminence,āā maintaining that argument here would be extremely difficult. That may explain why Trump said he acted based on different intelligence than what our own intelligence community provided him with. Trump might argue he was stepping in to protect our ally, Israel, but the success of that argument would depend on the legality of Israelās strikes. The United States has not taken that path in the past. In 1981, during the Reagan administration, we were part of a unanimous condemnation of Israel for launching an attack on a nuclear reactor in Baghdad. In 2007, the Bush administration declined a request to participate in a strike on a Syrian reactor. But the legal determinations will turn on factual ones, including how imminent of a threat Iran posed to Israel. There are lots of twists here, both factual and legal, and we will learn more in the coming days. Rather than taking the safer course and going to Congress for authorization or at least briefing the Gang of Eight (a group of bipartisan Congressional leaders), reports indicate that Republicans, but not Democrats, were briefed. Donald Trump claimed the power to strike for himself and he acted. Thatās the throughline for this administration from start to present. And although some Republicans claimed Democrats were not briefed because they would have leaked, that is belied by numerous administrations where the full gang of eight has been briefed on significant developments of high sensitivity. There is simply no basis for that allegation. I write to you a lot about the fact that where things start is not where they end up with the Trump administration. Here, we see that proposition on full display. Trump started by firing inspectors general without giving Congress the 30 days of notice required by law before doing that. Congress didnāt object. Trump kept going. He started dismantling executive branch agencies. Even though that tramples on Congressā power of the purse, they didnāt do much more than whimper. Then the White House tried to tie receipt of funds Congress has set aside to help states with transportation infrastructure to promises to help with immigration enforcement. Still, Congress did nothing. And the Supreme Court? The Court that held that there was virtually nothing a sitting president could do that would violate criminal law? They havenāt exactly given the president reason to pump the brakes either. Which is how we find ourselves at this juncture. When you get away with pushing the limits of power time after time, this is where you end up. Republicans in Congress, many of whom lauded Trump as the president who would end all wars, were, for the most part, quick to fall in line. The White House was quick to put up a release showing that everyone from Speaker Mike Johnson to Alabama Senator Katie Britt, who encouraged people to āpray for peaceā even as the president she supports attacked, to Representative Mike Lawler, who said, āWar has not been declared, however, a Nuclear Iran has been prevented. I fully support the Presidentās decision,ā had lined up behind Trump. Increasingly, itās hard to write a āWeek Aheadā column on Sunday nights, because so much of the crazy in this administration reveals itself over the course of each weekend. But there is a full legal docket ahead this week, which Iāll write about tomorrow night. In this moment, all eyes are focused on the fact that we have bombed Iran. We will not know what the long-term consequences of that action will be for some time. But two-week Don, the TACO president, sure showed them. The man who is too weak to take criticism and name-calling in stride, even though he does it relentlessly to others, the man who acts impulsively when challenged, remains in charge of the military and in control of the nuclear codes at this pivotal moment. Weāre in this together, Joyce |
Allah is merciful! Jolani is a model leader for the west!
I had a card with this guys face ffs
www.aljazeera.com
Al-Nusra Front changes name, breaks ties with al-Qaeda
Al Jazeera obtains exclusive video of Abu Mohammed al-Jolani, saying groupās name has changed to Jabhat Fath al Sham.
NZWarriors.com
Probably has his face on a credit card nowI had a card with this guys face ffs
Al-Nusra Front changes name, breaks ties with al-Qaeda
Al Jazeera obtains exclusive video of Abu Mohammed al-Jolani, saying groupās name has changed to Jabhat Fath al Sham.
-
Nobody is reading this thread right now.