What Trump did was illegal. You can't just fire cruise missiles into a country that has not attacked

[L. Coyote]

"What Trump did was illegal. You can't just fire cruise missiles into a country that has not attacked the U.S." Rep. Ted Lieu

Link to tweet

[Ohioblue22]

1. he a war criminal

[triron]

32. An equal opportunity criminal

[Jonny Appleseed]

2. Can a case be made in court that the president isn't allowed to blatantly violate the law

Just because of a partisan congress. If Trump went around shooting people on 5th avenue, could we seriously not do anything about it unless congress was willingly to impeach?

[BSdetect]

4. Absolutely should be taken to the Supreme Court asap.

Can we not sue Congress for failure to uphold the C?

Are they allowed to ignore this when they screamed about Syria whn O wanted their approval.

Total a holes.

[Averagegrunt]

3. Ummm

Bit of a stretch...

[L. Coyote]

8. Not according to Trump and 100 Republicans who opposed Obama doing it, threatened impeachment even.

I started a thread pointing to this:

Authorization for Military Force Against Syria to Respond to Use of Chemical Weapons

Link to tweet

[Averagegrunt]

10. absurd

They were absurd then and we are being absurd now

[L. Coyote]

11. Upsurd isn't even a word. To usurp the Constitution is absurd.

Especially when the trump's rationale is to stop the horrible plunge in his polls and deflect from the criminal #TrumpRussia investigation.

Link to tweet

[Averagegrunt]

12. Thanks!

Ill fix my post. I think my point still stands however. Are you suggesting a more aggressive approach? The cruise missiles were more of a show of force. Equal to spanking a child at Walmart.

[L. Coyote]

17. First order of business is to investigate who is responsible for the nerve gas.

That step was overlooked by Trump and pals.

Link to tweet

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

5. Lieu gives SCROTUS too much credit

saying he launched the missiles because he saw images that offended him. I doubt very much that the images of the injured Syrian children offended Trump at all; he's a narcissist for whom every event occurring in the world relates to him. It's more likely that he launched the missiles because he saw a chance to aggrandize himself by seeming to care about Syrian children. The fact that he does not care about them in the least is apparent from his refusal to accept Syrian refugees and his statement at a campaign rally that “I can look in their face and tell them they can’t come here."

[joshdawg]

27. drumpf SAYS that he saw images that offended him.

Bullshit!! He doesn't care about anyone except himself and his daughter/wife.

[L. Coyote]

6. White House Admits That Syria Missile Strike Was A Meaningless Publicity Stunt

White House Admits That Syria Missile Strike Was A Meaningless Publicity Stunt
By Jason Easley on Fri, Apr 7th, 2017 at 12:14 pm

Senior White House officials are admitting that the missile strike against Syria was not part of a broader strategy or part of an effort to remove Assad. In other words, the missile strike was a meaningless slap on the wrist that was intended to make Trump look strong

..... , the missile strike was a big showy empty gesture that was intended to get the president some good press.

The message that this White House sent to Assad was that the only price he will have to pay for using chemical weapons on his is own people is having 50 missiles lobbed in his direction. A missile strike without a plan is an empty gesture. Assad now knows that Trump is all talk and little action. He can do whatever he wants because Trump isn’t serious about Syria.

Much like Trump’s presidency, the missile strike was another loud but ultimately empty gesture by a president who incapable of formulating and pursuing coherent policies..

Link to tweet

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

9. Quelle surprise.

That was pretty obvious from the minute it happened. Trump doesn't do strategy; he just reacts. And what normally causes him to react is something that relates to his image or popularity. QED.

[jmg257]

7. But air strikes and ground troops are ok?

[That Guy 888]

14. Don't forget drones.

I don't want to defend Trump but the US has done plenty of similar attacks in the past. Reagan and Libya. Bush and Obama's drone strikes. Just because Trump is an ignorant, incompetent, corrupt, Putin puppet doesn't mean that he can't blow up brown people like our other Presidents.

[stevenleser]

34. See my #33 below regarding Obama's drone strikes. nt

[L. Coyote]

13. A Congressman Just Asked Trump the Four Syria Questions He MUST Answer

A Congressman Just Asked Trump the Four Syria Questions He MUST Answer
By Peter Mellado April 7, 2017

......... Rep. Jared Hoffman (D-CA) launched an attack of his own on his Facebook page.

In a scathing post today, he called-out Trump’s hypocrisy, exposed the fallacy of his motives, and asked the 4 questions every American needs to ask .........:

“Mr. President, you’re learning the hard way that navigating difficult policy issues from healthcare to foreign policy is actually complicated. That’s especially true with the myriad of conflicts and crises we face on the world stage.

But you cannot lead the free world by being impulsive, unilateral, and unpredictable. You have signaled for months that the US doesn’t care about humanitarian and moral issues. You’ve completely ignored a massive humanitarian crisis in east Africa that threatens starvation and death for 20 million people – in fact, you’ve proposed deep cuts to humanitarian aid that would make it worse. You’ve turned your back on desperate refugees fleeing Assad’s war crimes in Syria. You’ve signaled that Russia and Assad are free to do whatever they want because it’s not our fight – almost inviting more atrocities in Syria and beyond. And now you suddenly change your mind — but it’s not clear if it’s just this once, or something more.

Was it the images of dying Syrian babies, even though you ignored prior images of dying Syrian babies and all of the dying African babies?

Was it politics – perhaps your historically low poll numbers and complete lack of accomplishment in your first 11 weeks as President?

Was it the fact that oil prices will now magically go up, a boon to your fossil fuel cronies?

Or was it something else – a head fake vis-à-vis Russia in advance of [Secretary] Tillerson’s trip, to provide cover for the sanctions relief your team has been pursuing ever since before the election?

We shouldn’t have to ask these questions about our President, but with this President, I’m afraid we do...... Congress must reassert its authority over war decisions as called for by our Constitution.”

Thanks to the President’s abrupt and oddly-timed decision to insert the American military into this 6 year and running conflict, we are now fully engaged in the calamitous Syrian Civil War and all that comes with it. Let that sink in. ...............

Link to tweet

[Initech]

15. Plus he literally gave that land to Russia to set up a fucking base!!!!

In the words of Idiocracy, I'd like to base my foot up his ass!

[iluvtennis]

16. But it's Trump who believes rules don't apply to him. This needs to stop-hurry up Russia investigat.

[Laffy Kat]

18. It doesn't matter.

This administration gets away with everything.

[MountainFool]

19. Bush Doctrine

> What Trump did was illegal. You can't just fire cruise missiles into a country that has not attacked

You mean like the preemptive war in Iraq to destroy those nonexistent WMDs?

We've got a long history of war criminals residing in the White House.

It helps explain why we're not a member of the International Court. We've not taken the high-road in a long time.

[Thor_MN]

20. Beyond an illegal attack on a foreign country, he told the Russians that he was doing it.

Imagine FDR informing Germany that we were attacking Italy or North Africa...

[former9thward]

22. Are we at war with Russia?

When did that happen?

[Thor_MN]

23. Sorry, I'm not going to argue with you again.

Put the bottle down or find someone else to pick a fight with.

[former9thward]

26. I just wanted to know when the war started.

Have a great day!

[L. Coyote]

30. That agreement was in place before Trump took office.

Apparently, firing missiles has caused Russia to rescind it, placing US troops at risk. Oh well, Trump's bad.

[former9thward]

21. Clinton, Bush and Obama all did this.

Clearly the U.S. government does not care if it is "legal" or not.

[sarisataka]

31. Shhh

We're throwing stones in the glass house

[stevenleser]

35. See my #33 below regarding Obama's drone strikes. nt

[FairWinds]

24. the Bush war in 2003, Obama's drone

attacks, and Trump's cruise missile spasm

were and are all illegal.

Veterans For Peace

[stevenleser]

33. Not so fast regarding drone attacks on Al Qaeda, the Taliban and ISIS. Multiple UN Resolutions

identify these entities as terrorists and international criminals and exhorts all member nations to do everything possible to disrupt the flow of money to them, prevent foreign individuals from joining them, and otherwise do everything possible to bring them to justice and prevent them committing more crimes including acts that the UN believes to be crimes against humanity. Below are just two of many Resolutions that talk about this.

It's more than a stretch to consider the use of drones, air strikes, etc., against these covered entities to be illegal. If you think so, please cite the international law that you think makes it so.


https://www.un.org/press/en/2015/sc12168.doc.htm
Unanimously Adopting Resolution 2253 (2015), Security Council Expands Sanctions Framework to Include Islamic State in Iraq and Levant
Finance Ministers Further Outline Efforts to Supress Terrorist Financing
In a sweeping move to suppress the financing of terrorism, the Security Council today expanded and strengthened its Al-Qaida sanctions framework to include a focus on Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL/Da’esh) in an unprecedented meeting that heard finance ministers from around the world outline efforts to dismantle funding channels to a terrorist group now in control of large swaths of Iraq and Syria.

Through the unanimous adoption of resolution 2253 (2015) under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, the Council decided that the 1267/1989 Al-Qaida Sanctions Committee would be known as the “1267/1989/2253 ISIL (Da’esh) and Al-Qaida Sanctions Committee”, while the Al-Qaida Sanctions List would be known as the “ISIL (Da’esh) and Al-Qaida Sanctions List”.

The 28-page resolution, sponsored by the United States and the Russian Federation, and co-sponsored by a broad array of Governments, covers asset freeze, travel ban, arms embargo and listing criteria for ISIL, Al-Qaida and “associated individuals, groups, undertaking and entities” — measures that the Council decided it would review in 18 months or sooner, with a view to their possible strengthening.
.
.
.

https://www.un.org/press/en/2014/sc11520.doc.htm
"Recalling that their attacks against civilians on the basis of ethnic or religious identity might constitute crimes against humanity, it stressed the need to bring those perpetrators, including foreign fighters, to justice."
.
.
.
“Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations,
.
.
.
“5. Urges all States, in accordance with their obligations under resolution 1373 (2001), to cooperate in efforts to find and bring to justice individuals, groups, undertakings and entities associated with Al-Qaida including ISIL and ANF who perpetrate, organize and sponsor terrorist acts and in this regard underlines the importance of regional cooperation;


“6. Reiterates its call upon all States to take all measures as may be necessary and appropriate and in accordance with their obligations under international law to counter incitement of terrorist acts motivated by extremism and intolerance perpetrated by individuals or entities associated with ISIL, ANF and Al-Qaida and to prevent the subversion of educational, cultural, and religious institutions by terrorists and their supporters;

[FairWinds]

36. If Obama's intervention in Syria was so legal . .

why did he ask Congress to approve it?

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/01/world/middleeast/syria.html

And as you well know, the USG has little but contempt for the UN - so
why cite them?

Veterans For Peace

[stevenleser]

37. My post had nothing to do with Obama's intervention in Syria, at least as it applies to Assad

which is what he wanted congressional approval for.

[FairWinds]

38. It's worth remembering that ISIS would not exist . .

and there would be far fewer ME refugees were it not for
utterly careless and thoughtless US violence in the region - mostly
the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

And, well, the topic of the OP is Syria - you are thread drifting, not me.

Where are you located? Lets figure out a way to debate this in public.

Veterans For Peace

[stevenleser]

39. I was against the 2nd Iraq war so you are preaching to the choir there.

I am not thread drifting. You mentioned Obama and drones.

[FairWinds]

40. Have you seen this from the Front Page?

It's pretty good.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1017433535

Now I'm off to work on my sailboat . . gonna splash for the season soon.
(Sweetwater Seas, aka Great Lakes)

[RainCaster]

25. So what? DFT could molest little boys for the next four years...

and the GOP would let him. He gave them an abortion hating judge, so he can do no wrong.

[WhiteTara]

28. does this make him a war criminal? nt

[Amaryllis]

29. Navarro: "That he changed his position is not bewildering. He has had more positions than the

Kama Sutra on just about everything."

[L. Coyote]

41. Nancy Pelosi Demands Congressional Action To Stop Trigger-Happy Trump From Blowing Up The World

Link to tweet