I'm a little unclear on how even a joint resolution from Congress could "overturn" a military decision by the Commander in Chief. This is not a veto, which Congress has the power to override. It's an exercise of Article II powers that Congress does not share. Does she intend to declare war? I suppose that would create a duty for the Commander in Chief to fight the war, although he still would have a free hand as to strategy and tactics.
By the way, I'm pretty sure Congress didn't even authorize the mission in Syria. It's odd that Congress would raise so strenuous an objection to ending what they never authorized beginning.
12 comments:
To all questions on current communist politics, refer to the master.
"Who, whom". Lenin.
All else is irrelevant.
Recall that,like Senator Kerry and David Duke, during the Bush Administration, Nancy Pelosi made a pilgrimage to Damascus to share with Butcher Assad her opinion that the US should get out of Iraq.
Nancy will now tell us that her views have "evolved."
She's not talking about anything. She is a mouthpiece and tool of the DS. She does what she is ordered to do.
It's the same for Leftists. They do what they are ordered to do.
You asked who, Grim, was giving the orders. What evidence was there of a hierarchy?
Well, why do people call it the Deep State? That came from the Alt Right conspiracy land peeps.
And the CIA/FBi Does NOT have a hierarchy?
If there are no orders, why are these people all focus firing on Trum or the Tea Party? If there are no orders, are they just all psychic readers and remote viewers?
And another thing, remote viewing is important not for its questionable intel capacities. It is far more important for passing untraceable messages around, to create a quantum C4 network.
It would be a good thing if this forced Congress to take back its authority WRT declarations of war, but I doubt it would happen. They don't want anything to do with that level of controversy, and have entirely ceded it to the presidency at this point.
Graham's general but not entire support for the decisions of Trump is further evidence for a sad and dangerous thing about current American politics. Republicans can weigh one thing versus another, but the Democrats are increasingly defined by "Whatever Trump wants, we're against." I remember it as far back as the Reagan presidency, but it solidified under the Bushes and has been lock-step under Trump. It must make life easier, not having to think hard.
I don't know if you saw this over at Instapundit. It accords with much of what Andrew McCarthy said at National Review as well. I very much doubt Trump is a military genius, but his instincts to use economic pressure along with calculated threats and red lines may serve well enough as a general rule.
https://social.quodverum.com/@ThomasWic/102962919525947116
...the Democrats are increasingly defined by "Whatever Trump wants, we're against."
Yes, I was musing last night that if Trump had proposed the content of the 'bipartisan bicameral' agreement, they'd have gone just as insane. "You'll break NATO! You're risking war with Turkey! What about our nukes at Incirlik? What about the airmen there? This is impulsive, insane, and outrageous!"
People, and not just Democrats, have lost the plot. I think it's Twitter, mostly: it's brought them all together and made it a war of personalities, of insults and snark, of one-upsmanship and one-downsmanship. None of our leadership class nor our journalist class are thinking anymore. It's all pride and shame.
As Aristotle said of the magnanimous man, that man possessed of the capstone of complete virtue, he doesn't really care about pride or shame. He does what is most worthy of honor, not necessarily what will receive the most honor. He doesn't have to worry about his pride, because he knows he is worthy; and he doesn't have to worry about attempts to shame him, because he knows the shame doesn't properly attach to him.
They're missing the point of that entirely.
I very much doubt Trump is a military genius...
You've a fine talent for understatement. Wictor is someone I've encountered before. He's one of a few characters out there who are a little too sure that they've got the secret plan all figured out.
There's no secret plan. The most effective blow any foreign government landed in terms of election interference in 2016 was Ukraine's getting Paul Manafort fired, in August, while he was the head of the Republican Presidential campaign. No ordinary campaign would have recovered from such a blow, so shortly before the election. It should have sealed the deal for the Clinton machine.
The reason it didn't affect the Trump campaign much is that being thrown into chaos is indistinguishable from its ordinary state. There's no plan. But there is a kind of antifragility that comes from having adapted to a complete lack of order or reliable structure.
I wonder if the adaptability to chaos comes from Trump's business environment. He's had to get used to contractors that don't do their part, governments that change requirements mid-stream, unions and the Mafia, and things that just go hay-wire (storms delay construction, problems with materials, fire in a casino...) Directed chaos might be closer to his baseline business state, so he can adapt to it and anticipate it better than a true political machine or the usual politician would.
My $.02 worth.
LittleRed1
Also, to add on to LR1's comment, he wouldn't see it as a problem to be solved, unlike a lot of political / bureaucratic sorts who seem to hew to the lawful neutral in alignment.
Trum likes chaos because that's just what he thrives on. It is part of his celestial charts. He has found it works for him. He may not like it, one part of him at least, but he thrives on it. Just as he said about the impeachment fight. He energizes himself by fighting and this is the kind of social media fight he likes to do. He did it initially because it helped defend him psychologically or emotionally. Now he just does it because he feels like it or because he is too old dog to change his ways.
It is a lot easier seeing to the soul of Hussein and Trum, when I don't have political biases and blinders on.
I'm less and less able to see why Trump's approach is as obviously wrong as all my betters seem to think it is, but as usual, I'm puzzled by international and military strategy and have little confidence in any "solutions" I might dream up on my own.
Post a Comment