Over the past several months, I've heard numerous attempts at justifying the war in Iraq. All of these justifications prey on a moral idea that going to war will bring about democracy to Iraq, and ultimately lead to a safer America and as a super power in the world it is our obligation to make the world a safer place. But what is the cost to our Constitution and ultimately to our society?
Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution states:
" The Congress shall have power... To declare war, grant
letter of marque and reprisal... To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;"
This has been reiterated by the U.S. Supreme Court;
Talbot v. Seeman, 1801;
" The whole powers of war being by the Constitution of the United States vested in Congress, the acts of that body can alone be resorted to as our guides in this inquiry. It is not denied, nor in the course of the argument has it been denied, that Congress may authorize general hostilities, in which case the general laws of war apply to our situation, or partial hostilities, in which case the laws of war, so far as they actually apply to our situation, must be noticed."
Since, Congress never passed a declaration of war, How were we allowed to enter into a war with Iraq Constitutionally? We weren't!!
Several years ago, the President introduced to Congress the 'Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002' more commonly referred to as the "Iraq War Resolution". This resolution cited several reasons to categorize Iraq as an Imminent threat to Americas national security, allowing the President to exercise power to invade Iraq, these reasons include but are not limited to; Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction (WMD'S), Saddam Hussein and his regimes active link to Al-Queda and Iraq's numerous violations of United Nations Resolutions.
First off, the role of our President is to enforce national law as given in the Constitution and written by Congress. While the President has the ability to veto legislation that comes from the Congress, it is not the role of President to introduce legislation to congress. The founders of our country understood that the decision to go to war, was an ability far to powerful for one man to have. This is why the framers of our Constitution vested this power to the Legislative branch of our government.
It has been proven that several of the reasons given to justify the war have been proven false. Iraq did not have WMD's and they Saddam Hussein had no direct link to Al-Queda. Without these reasons, Iraq loses its title of being an imminent threat to our national security. It is true that Iraq has not adhered to numerous U.N. resolutions and has committed countless human rights violations upon its own citizens. But, do these actions, on there own, allow us to circumvent Constitutional protocol and enter into a conflict?
Since the creation of the atom bomb 60+ years ago and the U.S. establishing itself as a world super power. Many people, including politicians, feel that 'with great power comes great responsibility' and with this added power it is our duty to enact change on a global scale. This pattern of thinking has effectively altered our foreign policy and in many ways circumvented Constitutionally established limitations of power.
America was created on adherence of the rule of law. Our Constitution is the foundation of our laws. We place our walls of tradition, morals and ethical behavior upon this foundation. A house built with a disregard to its foundational limitations, is destined to collapse.
Regardless of our countries good intentions, it is not the duty of the United States government to police the world, we should never go to war to enforce U.N. resolutions. This behavior of circumventing Constitutional guidelines weakens the foundation of our country, and could ultimately lead to the collapse of our system.
0 comments:
Post a Comment