He wrote a book entitled, "War and Responsibility: Constitutional Lessons of Vietnam and Its Aftermath." There are people like Ely that believes the War Powers Resolution is unconstitutional. The declaration of war, by the way, is NOT one of the enumerated powers of the USA Constitution. The Right Wing on the issue of enumerated powers of the Tenth Amendment is stupid. There is no basis for that political rant. The laws of the country are based on the 'contextualized' understanding of the USA Constitution; not it's STRICT CONSTRUCTION. The idea THE WORDS have more meaning than reality is bullshit.
To counterbalance Ely is an essay at the Michigan Law Review by Philip Bobbitt entitled "War Powers: An Essay on John Hart Ely's..." (click here).
Get at least this much right, there are two separate war powers resolution, "The War Powers Act of 1942" of FDR and "The War Powers Resolution of 1973." So don't talk about something by the seat of your pants, IT SHOWS.
The first War Powers Act of 1942 CONTEXTUALIZED the right to war two weeks after the attack of the USA by Japan on Pearl Harbor. That act was then modified three months later to strengthen the Executive Branch's right to command the outcomes of the military.
The War Powers Resolution is a bit of a joke. It seeks to LIMIT the Executive Branch from being 'King of the War' by stating the President can only tirade 90 days without consent of Congress.
The fact of the matter is the war powers of the USA have grown vastly out of proportion to the nation's best interest. The war power of the USA assaults even the military strength of allies. If the USA's military power were to fall to a President and/or Congress that wanted the resources of the world within their powers, no different than the Holy Roman Empire, no country on Earth would have a chance including the citizens of the USA that would be receiving return fire. So, the entire idea ONE PERSON in the USA government can wield this power is complete assault against human rights of any nation, including that of the USA.
Believe Dempsey when he states, "That is not going to stop me." He means it. If he engages Syria and Russia sends assets (assets includes the Russian military power) the war would then escalate out of control. There could easily be an exchange of nuclear capacity between nations at that point and there probably would be.
Realize, that Russia and China 'stood down' from the Iraq invasion. They didn't have to and they are getting tired of the USA causing catastrophic damage to the world. At some point China will enter this engagement when it believes Russia is under attack due to their Friendship Pact of 2000.
The attacks on Syria are wrong. They are wrong for many, many reasons, but, the primary reason is that if Russia should send assets to Syria they are legally correct. Internationally, the USA is way out of line and are simply pushing their limits because it did in Iraq. John McCain is the poster child for the Arrogant Neocon. McCain actually believes in the limited nuclear strike and thinks that is all that is needed to scare off any potential or actual enemy of the USA. What does he care, he'll be in a bunker somewhere believing he could actually breath unfiltered air again on sacred ground where Arizonians were toasted by foreign nukes.
The FACTS are very simple. The USA is hideous and ridiculous when it comes to Syrian chemical weapons. It is acting as if it had the capacity to happen in the USA. War abroad is not going to limit the scope of a chemical weapon attack as happened in Japan. The entire political dogma today is so out of sync with reality it is endangering it's own people. Homeland Security needs to be sure there are no potential for creating or owning chemical weapons in the USA, not the DOD.
The FACTS surrounding this is very simple. Assad legally owns chemical weapons. He has used them against his own people. The acts were indiscriminate in areas of the country where oppositional/rebel forces did not have supply lines or organized infantry to attack Assad forces by killing innocent women and children. Assad could argue those people were human shields of the rebels. Assad has committed human rights violations and insulted the Geneva Conventions. Syria ratified the First Protocol of the Geneva Conventions, but, none since including Protocol II and III.
The International Community President Obama handily insulted to bring about meaningful dialogue regarding Syria and OTHER NATIONS like it; is fully aware of their limits to act in this instance. The PROBLEM the USA has MANUFACTURED for itself is the overwhelming power of it's military and how it can engage war without consent or ALLIANCE WITH another nation's military. The unilateral capacity of the USA is a very big problem. The American people have to tell their military "NO" and put out of office any Representative or Senator that doesn't 'get it.'
The United Nations SUCCESSFULLY carried out inspections. That was partly due to the fact the USA was within missile capacity of Syria. I am fairly convinced of that. The United Nations is stating military power should not be used. Syria is a problem for the global community as are other nations that still own chemical weapons capacity. The larger international community has to decide this. The USA should not act unilaterally in any of these decisions. The American people have to tell their military "NO" and put out of office any Representative or Senator that doesn't 'get it.'
This is not our war, but, the political dogma in the USA currently wants it to be ours and put us back 'into the business' of military capacity and hardware.
There is no safe strike into Syria. If Russia is convinced Assad controls the chemical weapons of that nation, it is not bad place to be. There are significant terrorist elements within the opposition to the Syrian government and that cannot be overlooked.
And, oh by the way, Russia was once a USA ally. How quickly we forget. Human Rights violations are not war, but, they are a quick and easy trick for 'making war.'
One other thing, when the Bush/Cheney military machine entered Iraq, the country was disarmed and it's chemical stockpiles were under UN seals. Syria is not Iraq.
NO. Just say NO.
We don't belong in Syria.
We never did.
