"Can Obama act in Iraq without going to Congress?"

"Last August, shortly after the U.S. government said forces loyal to Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad had used chemical weapons against opposition forces near Damascus, President Obama announced he would be asking Congress for permission to strike the Assad regime.

...With Syria, the president never got his authorization, and the strikes never happened...

Should laws be violated
to uphold a president’s right to executive privilege?

...legislative aides say that while Congress must be consulted, the president may already have the legal authority to act.

Were Hitler’s actions legal
under German law?

...An aide to the House Armed Services Committee stressed that legislators were in the early stages of contemplating what if any authorities might be needed.

If a US president orders others to commit crimes
did they both break laws?

...The group currently known as Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant was once allied with Al Qaeda, but the two groups split publicly months ago. That means that ISIL, despite its ideological similarities with Al Qaeda, wouldn’t be covered by the 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force, passed in the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

If the Attorney General of the United States
takes an oath to uphold the law
are there exceptions if the suspect is the president of the United States?

Legal experts such as former Bush Justice Department official Jack Goldsmith have argued that the 2002 Authorization to Use Military Force in Iraq might give the president statutory power to act. “The 2002 AUMF has no geographical limitation,” Goldsmith wrote.  “It authorizes force not in Iraq, but rather “against the continuing threat posed by Iraq.”

Would you prefer to live
where your religion was the state religion?

Stephen Vladeck, a professor at American University’s Washington College of Law, said he wasn’t sure that on its own the Iraq AUMF would cover the current crisis. “I’m somewhat more circumspect [than Goldsmith], as I don’t think Congress back in 2002 could fairly have been said to be authorizing military force in perpetuity against any group in, or coming from, Iraq,” Vladeck said."


If another wants to kill your two children 
and your goal is to keep them alive
is a balanced position between the two the death of one child?

If the government eliminated the constitutional rights of some citizens
would you risk your life in the fight for their return?

Why did America occupy Iraq?

The power of the Executive to cast a man into prison
without formulating any charge known to the law
and particularly to deny him the judgment of his peers
is, in the highest degree, odious
and is the foundation of all totalitarian governments

Extraordinary powers assumed by the Executive 
with the consent of Parliament in emergencies should be yielded up
 when and as the emergency declines

This is really the test of civilization

Winston S  Churchill

Why would oil producers want to inflame geopolitical tensions
when oil prices fall?

No comments: