Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter Share on Facebook 1 Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Fark! Share on Reddit Share on StumbleUpon Tell A Friend (1 Shares)  
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites View Stats   No comments

OpEdNews Op Eds

"Proportional Response, Anyone?

By       Message Dave Lefcourt     Permalink
      (Page 1 of 1 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com Headlined to H3 8/28/13

- Advertisement -

From http://www.flickr.com/photos/28650594@N03/5577263418/: USS Barry fires Tomahawk missiles [Image 2 of 2]
USS Barry fires Tomahawk missiles [Image 2 of 2] by DVIDSHUB

U.S. cruise missile fired from a U.S. Destroyer

In response to the gas attacks last week in Syria that killed hundreds and attributed to President Bashar Assad's government by the U.S. government, yet unconfirmed by U.N. chemical inspectors on the alleged scene in Damascus, the White House, according to a government official is seeking a "medium" level intensity military strike on Syrian government installations, "just muscular enough not to get mocked, just enough to be more than symbolic, (in other words a "proportionate response", whatever that really means).

Meanwhile White House advisors "indicated" they would not seek a vote in Congress or go to the U.N. Security Council for authorization to use force, (again in other words, these are just some minor legal impediments we can ignore and besides who is going to object a few pansies in Congress?).

Amazingly, (or rather not so amazingly considering the stenographic reporting by the corporate media), there is no criticism, (even skepticism) of the clearly illegal and un-Constitutional path the White House is considering in dismissing the need to go before Congress to seek authorization before going to war or going before the U.N. Security Council to gain its authorization.

Lets remember the only Constitutionally legal justification for going to war must be voted on and approved by Congress and the U.N. Charter, which the U.S. as an original signatory, states a country must be in danger of imminent attack or been attacked as the only justification to go to war. And the U.N. Security Council is the only internationally authorized body that can intervene into the affairs of another country and that requires a unanimous vote by the five permanent members.

Now I can hear the "snickering in the aisles" sort of speak that raising this "legalism" stuff is like delving into quaint nostalgia. But without legal, Constitution granted authorization, the U.S. government is just another international authoritarian aggressive thug acting with impunity.

And that needs to be said clearly and unmistakably. The American people need to face the truth of their government's mendacity, not deny or ignore it as if it isn't happening or be in denial or retreat into some personal mindless distraction as if it's not their problem and besides what can they do about it anyway. Is this not the cowardly approach seen in Hollywood movies where the bully terrorizes everyone in the town and the townspeople cringe in fear rather than confronting him and taking him on until Clint Eastwood arrives, gives them some backbone where they then act together to rid themselves of the bully thus saving them from personal disgrace and humiliation.

- Advertisement -

It's true, according to polls the overwhelming majority, some 80 % of the American people oppose intervention in Syria so maybe most are paying attention and not being as somnambulant as I make them to be.

But the situation goes beyond the polls. The government in America isn't listening to you and doesn't care a wit what you think. It is "listening" to all your electronic communications because your government sees you as the enemy.

This upcoming military intervention in Syria probably won't have the impact to arouse the American people to act and oppose it, (beyond giving their opinion in a poll). The government's propaganda machine has been in full throttle "justifying" why it needs to attack Syria as some necessary "humanitarian intervention" that requires no legal authorization before it takes action.

Thus far domestically the U.S. government has been mostly engaged in clandestine monitoring and keeping track of the American people, while prosecuting whistleblowers (Bradley Manning), conducting a witch hunt to have NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden extradited back to the U.S. to face bogus charges of criminality and sowing fear in other potential whistleblowers who may consider exposing the truth to investigative reporters like Glenn Greenwald et al to further reveal and expose the U.S. government's sinister activity.

So attacking Syria without legal authorization? It's just another small terror like operation disguised as "humanitarian" but really another example of the U.S. government's descent into banditry with no expectation to be held to account for its actions.          

- Advertisement -

 

- Advertisement -

View Ratings | Rate It

dglefc22733@aol.com
Retired. The author of "DECEIT AND EXCESS IN AMERICA, HOW THE MONEYED INTERESTS HAVE STOLEN AMERICA AND HOW WE CAN GET IT BACK", Authorhouse, 2009

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon


Go To Commenting

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Related Topic(s): ; , Add Tags
- Advertisement -

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

An Ominous Foreboding, Israel vs Iran

The Evolving Populist Political Rebellion in the Arab World

A Nuclear War Would Be Insane

The Rich Get Richer, the Poor Get Poorer, While the Middle Class Gets Decimated

CIA in the Crosshairs

Iran Offers 9 Point Plan to end Nuclear Crisis, U.S. "No thanks".