See other Ron Paul Articles
Title: Congressional Critics Dream of Confiscating Trump's Military Powers
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://nationalinterest.org/feature ... iscating-trumps-military-23019
Published: Nov 3, 2017
Author: Curt Mills
Post Date: 2017-11-03 07:20:28 by Ada
Keywords: None
Views: 2259
Comments: 69
Sen. Chris Murphy is leading the charge to prevent a first strike on North Korea, while others are renewing the call for a fresh charter on Trump’s ability to conduct war in the Middle East. Sen. Chris Murphy and allies appeared in front of the Capitol on Thursday to push legislation that would hamstring President Donald Trump’s ability to unilaterally first-strike North Korea without Congressional authorization. Appearing with Murphy were a gathering of anti-war protestors, including Code Pink activists, and colleagues Sen. Ed Markey, the war hero Sen. Tammy Duckworth, and Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, a star of Trump-era politics, among others. Co-sponsoring the Senate bill with Murphy is Sen. Cory Booker; both Murphy and Booker are widely believed to have future designs on the White House-- and Sen. Bernie Sanders is on the bill, as well. The legislation “will make it very clear that, absent an attack or an imminent threat, the president has to come to Congress for prior authorization” to launch a strike on the Kim regime, Murphy told reporters on a call earlier this week. “I think that if we were able to get this very simple resolution on the floor of the Senate, it would pass. … I worry that the president’s enthusiasm will not be checked by the advisors around him.” Matthew Bunn at Harvard tells me: “Basically, there are no formal procedures to prevent the President from using nuclear weapons. In principle, he has sole power to order a nuclear attack,” but notes: “There are, however, a number of human beings in the command chain who would have to implement such an order.” An advisor to the U.S. Navy says: “The secretary of Defense has to concur for a launch to happen but can’t outright veto it. So, the president can fire the secretary in the case of nonconcurrence and keep firing people until an acting secretary concurs.” Secretary of Defense Sebastian Gorka, anyone? An advisor to the U.S. Army tells me such a situation -- a Pentagon Saturday night massacre -- would be “unprecedented.” But Thomas J. Brynne, president of the Korea Society, isn’t that worried, recent presidential bluster aside. “The Democratic Senators and Congressmen seem to be in line with Secretary James Mattis and the South Korean Defense Minister, Song Young-Moo,” based on language the two issued last week in Seoul that was “clearly defensive, deterrent and diplomatic,” Brynne told me, writing en route to Beijing. “I don’t think it’s likely,” Anthony Ruggiero of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, a think tank well-connected with the administration, says of a U.S. first strike. Ruggiero tells me: “I think that would be a hard argument to make, including South Korea, whose made it very clear any preemptive or preventive military strike would have to be done with their approval.” Byrne and others see politics at play. “It seems to me the Democratic lawmakers are political posturing,” Byrnne tells me. “Will never pass. Pointless. It’s showboat politics,” a senior fellow at a national security think tank remarks to me. An aide to a prominent Democratic senator singles out Cory Booker’s involvement: “Most things Booker gets on are automatically not serious.” Says the U.S. Navy advisor: “I’m still convinced this stuff is posturing on both sides. Trump is echoing Nixon’s madman theory.” But others are worried. “I think there is broad concern about the danger of war,” says Harvard’s Bunn. “President Trump’s warlike rhetoric, undermining of diplomatic approaches -- ‘[Secretary of State Rex] Tillerson is ‘wasting his time’ -- and general unpredictability have got people rattled. I’ve had people in California call me and ask if they should get their family out of the city.” Harry Kazianis of the Center for the National Interest isn’t attempting to read the president’s mind, but points out the folly of any hypothetical first strike. “Pentagon sources I have spoken to have been clear--we don't know where all of North Korea's nuclear weapons and missiles are,” Kazianis tells me. “If we were to launch even the most devastating military strike, the chances are high we would have left at least a few nuclear weapons behind.” And Kim Jong Un would have every incentive to use them for revenge: Seoul, Tokyo, Guam, Los Angeles. But FDD’S Ruggiero thinks Murphy’s legislation could compromise U.S. national security interests. Ruggiero hones in on the legislation’s language -- prohibiting a strike “absent an imminent threat to the United States.” “That does not cover our allies,” Ruggiero says. “So, if there was an imminent threat to South Korea or Japan. Under this authority, would the president have to get congressional approval?” Could this even pass? Murphy says if this can get a floor vote in Mitch McConnell’s chamber, it would even get some Republican support to push it over the top. Sens. Jeff Flake and Bob Corker, the foreign relations chair, have openly called into question the president’s fitness in recent weeks. Requests for comment into their offices went unanswered. But universal Democratic support isn’t assured, either, despite the president’s pariah status on the left. “It would set a dangerous president if this was passed,” an aide to one of the most hawkish Democratic senators tells me, noting the member is undecided, but that lawmaker “has always been on the side that president shouldn’t be handicapped when it comes to military force.” There are other efforts underway to curtail the military authority of the president, as well. Markey and Rep. Ted Lieu have legislation that would prohibit the president from using nuclear weapons unless it was authorized by Congress, or if a nuclear attack on the United States or its allies was actually underway. Says Bunn: “Most Presidents would argue that this is contrary to their power as Commander in Chief. Like the North Korea legislation, this is not likely to become law in the current environment – though there’s a strong case to be made that it’s the right direction to go.” And on Monday night, Mattis and Tillerson appeared before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to defend the existing Authorizations for Use of Military Force (AUMF), in effect the president’s charter for continued war against extremism in the Middle East. Tillerson noted that while they would welcome a renewed statement of support for their efforts, it is not necessary, and that a new AUMF that curtailed their autonomy would be potentially calamitous. But the status quo is not going to cut it for Democrats and even some in the president’s own party who view him as reckless, to put it mildly. And Murphy doesn’t trust Tillerson, oft-hailed by the president’s critics as “one of the adults in the room.” Murphy told me earlier this year that the former Exxon chief seeks to “neuter” his own department. “I think he took this job knowing that he was going to oversee the dramatic weakening of this department … he's been fairly enthusiastic in that endeavor.” Critics of the president are clearly disturbed by many of the messages coming out of this White House. But absent a Democratic takeover of Congress in 2018, are their efforts to assert greater authority anything more than political statements-- or auditions to take on Trump in 2020? Curt Mills is a foreign-affairs reporter at the National Interest. Follow him on Twitter: @CurtMills.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-14) not displayed.
.
.
.
#15. To: sneakypete (#14)
Kim had his own brother offed? It must have been an egregious thing. You think may be was plotting to overthrow his own brother? ;) "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
China has told Kim repeatedly to stop the nuclear testing. And has he? No. So that puts him at odds with the Chinkernese. And we all know what that means. Every time they want Kim to start something and raise the heat on the peninsula, they would yank his chain to get him going. ;) "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
You know this how? The MSM tell you?
You've been drinking the Kool Aid again.
Have either of you seen a night time satellite image of the Korean peninsula? It is a strange sight to see. South Korea shows large areas illuminated by electricity, while the North is dark all over except for a small spot around Pyongyang. Electricity in North Korea is rationed and only on for a few hours every day. We will be in deep doo doo if Kim does something crazy with his nukes and puts the rest of us back into the stone age. An EMP would do this. And none of us wants to freeze in the dark. ;) "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
China has publicly stated it would not back NK if it initiated violence which would imply that they otherwise would.
Our fear is what keeps NK safe. If they didn't have them, we would destroy them as we did Serbia, Iraq and Libya.
It's all of a piece with the age old problem of dynastic succession. NK's constitution requires the country's ruler be a descendant of Kim Il Sung. KJU's brother was a threat as long as he continued breathing, regardless of whatever designs he might have had or might not have had on his half brother's job. It's reported that China this week threw a wrench into an assassination plot to knock off KJU's nephew.
Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded. - James Madison
Interesting to say the least. What happens if Kim is knocked off and there is no one in line to succeed him? ;)
"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
Of course he did. His HALF-brother was a threat to his rule,and wasn't living in NK because he didn't want to be executed like his uncle was. I MIGHT be wrong about this,but I think Kim has his uncle's wife and their children executed,too. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
You know this how? The MSM tell you? Well,he is at least as rational as you are. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Right. Which one of us has never lived in Asia,and which one of us is a conspiracy freak? ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
I have. When I was stationed on Okinawa we used to send mobile training teams to South Korea to train with the SK SF. One of our NCO's was even named as the Defense Minister of South Korean by the SK president in the early 60's. The US and SK teams were at a "end of mission" party where everybody gets drunk and praises each other for a job well done,and the SK SF guys had family and friends there. When the SFC gave his little speech he talked about the positive things they had gained,and said he hoped they could accomplish even more the next time. One of the civilian guys in a suit raised his hand and asked him "what needs to be done to improve our security and training?",and the SFC was just drunk enough he told him. He didn't know it,but the guy he was talking to was the President of SK,who announced on the spot he wanted to make him the new defense minister of SK. I understand heads were exploding in Foggy Bottom over that one for the next couple of days. The SFC couldn't accept the position for a number of reasons,the prime one being he was a serving NCO in the United States Army. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
All nations have public policy positions. Some are serious,and some are said for political reasons. MY best guess is China will eventually come to realize they can no longer control Kim with money,food,weapons,etc,etc,etc,and they will end up being the ones behind the coup that kills and replaces him. No way in hell do they want a nuclear war right on their borders. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Then why didn't we do it before they had nukes? OOPS! That's right! If we had done it before,there couldn't be a conspiracy theory about it now,and you couldn't get your little cheap thrill rush from "being one of the few in the know!". SOMETIMES conspiracy theories are based on actual facts,but mostly they are bullshit. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
What will PROBABLY happen is the NK Politburo will meet and name his closest blood relative male the new President for Life. Then again,his closest blood relative might run for his life at the first whisper of this happening,or their Chinese Masters might order them to hold an actual election with the Chinese pick winning. They could even be allowed to join with SK to unite the country again,but I can't imagine that happening anytime soon. It would disturb the balance of power in Asia too much. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
We tried but had to settle for a cease fire. The conspiracy theory here has been developed by the US, i.e., that NK plans to nuke another country. No evidence at all to support.
And no way does China want one million NK refugees crossing their border to escape .
I pick and choose which conspiracy theories to support. As do you.
Will Russia take them???
I think any NK refugees would head toward the Chinese border. In any event, one million refugees to too much for any nation to absorb.
I doubt it. There are 10 million illegal Chinese in eastern Russia and they can do nothing about it. Where would they put the North Koreans? ;) "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
China Russia NK all communists. Take a look at their common border.
We tried but had to settle for a cease fire. Where the HELL did you "learn" this stuff? ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
That doesn't worry the Chinese at all. They would just gun them down and not worry about it. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
The difference is the ones I support are more fact than theory. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Not true. Only NK is still a communist nation. The others have evolved to being fascist nations,with Russia teetering on maybe being fascist,and maybe being mostly free. She could still go either way. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Even if that were so, so what? Even if they were all open-border libertarians, they would balk at that figure. As it is, China has a problem with Koreans sneaking over their border. However, I haven't read of any such problem with the Russian border but maybe no one has reported it.
LOL!!! Well at least you had 2 out of 3 correct. Unless you've been in a coma for the past 26 years, you should know that Russia is now a constitutional democracy. The USSR ceased to exist back in 1991. China is still communist.
Belief, not fact. You believe the government handouts.
Still socialist and perhaps becoming more so.
Ever hear of the Korean War?
The Communist Party of China still runs the show..
True. When I wrote that China was becoming more socialist, I meant that contrary to certain beliefs, China was not turning capitalist. Looks like they tried it for a while but found it wanting.
Only technically. They are now fascists in reality. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Hands out what? ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Yeah. I had a lot of friends and relatives that fought in it. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Communist Party of China They can call themselves unicorns if they want,but they are fascists. There is no comparison of the Chinese government of today,and the Chinese government of the 50's and 60's,other than the uniforms and the flags. The North Korea of today is VERY close to the China of the 60's and earlier. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
A very nasty war, almost forgotten today. We didn't win.
Yeah,we did. We just didn't demand the enemy surrender and form a new government. We punked out right at the end,due to the Communists in the WH,Congress,and the US Senate. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Comments (56 - 69) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestOf course he is, WTF do you think ordered him killed?
#16. To: sneakypete (#14)
(Edited)
If I had to guess,my guess would be it is China that is working behind the scenes to have that madman overthrown.
#17. To: sneakypete (#14)
True,but he IS crazy as a rabid rat.
#18. To: sneakypete (#13)
What YOU don't seem to understand is there there IS no "them'. There is only a "HIM","Maximum Leader Fat Boy Kim",and he is barking at the moon nuts.
#19. To: sneakypete, Ada (#13)
#20. To: sneakypete (#14)
#21. To: BTP Holdings (#19)
We will be in deep doo doo if Kim does something crazy with his nukes and puts the rest of us back into the stone age. An EMP would do this. And none of us wants to freeze in the dark. ;)
#22. To: BTP Holdings (#15)
#23. To: randge (#22)
#24. To: BTP Holdings (#15)
Kim had his own brother offed?
#25. To: Ada (#17)
True,but he IS crazy as a rabid rat.
#26. To: Ada (#18)
You've been drinking the Kool Aid again.
#27. To: BTP Holdings (#19)
Have either of you seen a night time satellite image of the Korean peninsula?
#28. To: Ada (#20)
(Edited)
China has publicly stated it would not back NK if it initiated violence which would imply that they otherwise would.
#29. To: Ada (#21)
Our fear is what keeps NK safe. If they didn't have them, we would destroy them as we did Serbia, Iraq and Libya.
#30. To: BTP Holdings (#23)
Interesting to say the least. What happens if Kim is knocked off and there is no one in line to succeed him? ;)
#31. To: sneakypete (#29)
(Edited)
Then why didn't we do it before they had nukes?
#32. To: sneakypete (#28)
#33. To: sneakypete (#26)
Right. Which one of us has never lived in Asia,and which one of us is a conspiracy freak?
#34. To: Ada (#32)
And no way does China want one million NK refugees crossing their border to escape .
#35. To: Cynicom (#34)
Will Russia take them???
#36. To: Cynicom (#34)
Will Russia take them???
#37. To: Ada (#35)
I think any NK refugees would head toward the Chinese border. In any event, one million refugees to too much for any nation to absorb.
#38. To: Ada (#31)
Then why didn't we do it before they had nukes?
#39. To: Ada (#32)
And no way does China want one million NK refugees crossing their border to escape .
#40. To: Ada (#33)
I pick and choose which conspiracy theories to support. As do you.
#41. To: Cynicom (#37)
China Russia NK all communists.
#42. To: Cynicom (#37)
China Russia NK all communists.
#43. To: Cynicom (#37)
China Russia NK all communists.
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination 
#44. To: sneakypete (#41)
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination
#45. To: sneakypete (#40)
The difference is the ones I support are more fact than theory.
#46. To: FormerLurker (#44)
China is still communist.
#47. To: sneakypete (#38)
#48. To: Ada (#46)
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination
#49. To: FormerLurker (#48)
The Communist Party of China still runs the show..
#50. To: FormerLurker (#44)
China is still communist.
#51. To: Ada (#45)
You believe the government handouts.
#52. To: Ada (#47)
Ever hear of the Korean War?
#53. To: FormerLurker (#48)
The Communist Party of China still runs the show..
#54. To: sneakypete (#52)
#55. To: Ada (#54)
We didn't win
.
.
.