bigtree
bigtree's JournalAppreciation thread for all folks here committed and dedicated to issues and advocacy over politics
. . . we have a desperate need for information and activism out here in the country, not shallow appeals for fealty to politics and politicians. If you didn't realize it already, I'd like to point out to you that there's a fight on in America for the very heart and soul of our democracy; a fight to elevate our principles and values over the ephemeral and ultimately compromised politics of convenience and opportunity.
What I think has garnered our attention in Ferguson, beyond the very real and tragic death of a jaywalking youth at the hands of a policeman - and the failure, so far, to move decisively to prosecute the killer - are the sparks of hope which have flashed from the edges of the smoke, gas, and rubber bullets hurled at the very conscience of the town as we watch the people in that community scatter and then regroup - over and over - and return again and again with the same demands for accountability from their elected and appointed officials and officers.
Certainly they realize by now that there's no real impetus at all from their leaders to accommodate their demands without their constant presence and protests. Outside of the cameras and the images which have flittered in and out of our view screens from these independent sources of live feed; in the vast area of neighborhood surrounding the sleepless edges of the target area of press and protest; there's something substantial which is transcending the long-ago faded hopes that the attention and commotion from their demonstrations for justice and accountability would produce livelihoods and futures which would lift the community out of despair and provide the prosperity and self-determination promised by the politics and politicians of past and present.
Theirs is a lasting brand of hope and aspiration which will always stand and regroup long after the cynical and opportunistic blasts of smoke and gas have dissipated into the compromised air. We are fortunate to witness such courage and resilience in the face of such unbelievable and unimaginable anguish. We are inspired by it, and challenged to stand firm in our own beliefs, and to regroup our values with every deliberate diversion and deliberate distraction. We're inspired to hold fast to our own principles in the face of derision and ridicule for not adhering to some petty political motivation or motive.
Here's to this generation's patriots who doggedly place progress over the politics of the day. Here's to this new generation's defenders of liberty, freedom, and democracy! Here's to the end of the reign of this one-percent confederation of corporate interests. Here's to us!
Dude. A white woman approached in a dark parking lot in Ferguson by two panicked black men?
tweeted by, Joel D. Anderson@ blackink12 (Senior sports writer at @BuzzFeed. @PostBourgie blogger emeritus.)
Joel D. Anderson @blackink12 · 4h
I'm back at my hotel near the airport. Me and @JstnMchl flagged down a woman in all of that chaos who got us out of there.
Joel D. Anderson @blackink12 · 4h
We were lost. A cop pointed a gun at us because we were running, trying to stay away from the tear gas and flash bombs behind us.
Joel D. Anderson @blackink12 · 4h
It occurred to me those officers had no way of knowing I was media. Not that they would have cared. I had to put my hands up and move slowly
Joel D. Anderson @blackink12 · 4h
The cops continued to yell at us from across the street. I couldn't understand them. I just kept my hands up, & yelled at others to do same
Joel D. Anderson @blackink12 · 4h
I literally felt trapped. We couldn't go back. But ahead of us, cops were pointing guns and yelling inscrutable orders at us.
Joel D. Anderson @blackink12 · 4h
Everyone was confused. There was literally almost nowhere to go. We went into a parking lot, and cars were peeling off all around us
Joel D. Anderson @blackink12 · 3h
And I guess my angel is Stacy Graham of Jerseyville, Illinois. I saw her backing up and asked her if she would give us a ride.
Joel D. Anderson @blackink12 · 3h
Dude. A white woman approached in a dark parking lot by two panicked black men? And she still told us to get on in.
Joel D. Anderson @blackink12 · 3h
Other stuff happened. But we're back at the hotel. My car and everything else is back at the McDonald's on West Florissant.
Joel D. Anderson @blackink12 · 3h
So I guess I have to trust I can get back into Ferguson in about five hours and that nothing will happen. What should I think about that?
Joel D. Anderson @blackink12 · 3h
One final thing. As @JstnMchl said: The police are the ones making this dangerous. They risked so many lives tonight for...I don't know why
___ 
Stark, Raw Perspective From Assorted Tweets On Ferguson Sunday Night
Antonio French@AntonioFrenchDad, Husband, Alderman of the @21stWard in St. Louis,
Retweeted by Antonio French
Mark Bland @markbland · 45s
BREAKING: SWAT team moves in on reported confrontation where #MichaelBrown was shot #Ferguson”
Retweeted by Antonio French
Alex Wroblewski @alexwroblewski · 1h
Protesters return tear gas canisters at police in #Ferguson pic.twitter.com/cHNU2LD3Ev
Retweeted by Antonio French
Alex Wroblewski @alexwroblewski · 40m
Protesters in #Ferguson after getting hit by tear gas from police pic.twitter.com/UgqDuhxBWw
Retweeted by Antonio French
Robert Cohen @kodacohen · 8m
Protestors flee scene after marching toward police command center, tear gas flying in #Ferguson #MikeBrown
Antonio French @AntonioFrench · 2h
Scenes from last night in #Ferguson pic.twitter.com/cG95dhiTGH
Antonio French @AntonioFrench · 29m
There is a small group of people who cannot be defined as protestors/demonstrators. They are more like fighters/rebels/insurgents. #Ferguson
Antonio French @AntonioFrench · 19m
These people are not protestors. This is something different and it has little to do with #JusticeForMikeBrown.
Antonio French @AntonioFrench · 28m
Whenever police come to shut down West Florissant they are prepared to fight back. And they are getting more organized and coordinated.
Retweeted by Antonio French
Danny Wicentowski @D_Towski · 13m
I can see several people down canfield confronting line of police vehicles and officers. No violence, just shouting. So far.
Antonio French @AntonioFrench · 48s
Official curfew starts in 7 minutes. #Ferguson
Antonio French @AntonioFrench · 1h
I'm safely out of the area. Saddened by tonight's events.
Antonio French @AntonioFrench · 1h
Our present situation is bad. The trust broken by the #Ferguson police is endangering lives. We have to repair it. Communities need police.
Antonio French @AntonioFrench · 1h
Each day County Prosecutor Bob McCulloch delays indicting #DarrenWilson, he is endangering citizens and delaying the rebuilding of trust.
Antonio French @AntonioFrench · 1h
Once there was a shooting, police had to come in. That being said, I'm troubled by tweets I'm reading saying children were gassed. #Ferguson
Antonio French @AntonioFrench · 15s
Been on the phone. Just as these young people must mature into leaders quickly, #STL's black leadership must also step up. Meeting tomorrow.
Antonio French @AntonioFrench · 23m
This thing has the potential to further escalate. Black leadership in STL has a chance to avoid that. We must reach out to these men today.
______________________________________________
Amy K. Nelson @AmyKNelson
I rip and run. | Contributing Editor, @ANIMALNewYork | journalist | global traveler | photographer
Amy K. Nelson @AmyKNelson · 34m
so we won't ever be able to see result of that standoff on Canfield Road. it will be the residents of #Ferguson word against the police.
Amy K. Nelson @AmyKNelson · 37m
guess that's what happens when media watches cops live mace a guy on ground in cuffs. #ferguson
Amy K. Nelson @AmyKNelson · 38m
getting kicked out. will be subject to arrest. "keep going" one officer said to me. no 1 can give us name. "have goodnight sir." is answer.
Amy K. Nelson @AmyKNelson · 42m
Two others arrested too...both white, one man one woman. Arrested man first she came over to us they figured it out arrested her too.
Amy K. Nelson @AmyKNelson · 44m
just arrested for curfew violation. http://instagram.com/p/r1CGVKssi5/
Amy K. Nelson @AmyKNelson · 48m
they just maced him .. "wipe this shit off my eyes I can't feel my fucking eyes" he's screaming. #ferguson
Amy K. Nelson @AmyKNelson · 48m
two men just walked past us walked into cops and were arrested for curfew violation. "just bc I'm black" #ferguson
Amy K. Nelson @AmyKNelson · 23m
all was quiet until sounded like bottle broke & then possible gunshot near QuickTrip... we are in middle of two diff police lines #ferguson
Amy K. Nelson @AmyKNelson · 35m
We've negotiated a stay. Still here just a little farther back. The standoff is still happening. #Ferguson
Amy K. Nelson @AmyKNelson · 6m
total censorship right now being ordered back to the media pen bc yanno #ferguson
Amy K. Nelson @AmyKNelson · 11m
Police parked big empty bus that is conveniently running so now we can't hear what cops/residents are saying. #ferguson
Amy K. Nelson @AmyKNelson · 27m
@EddiesMind they would but cops are keeping us too far back. some here w telephoto lens will come out later
Amy K. Nelson @AmyKNelson · 33m
they just pulled up tear gas truck ... looks like they're gonna has them all residents have hands in Air #ferguson
Amy K. Nelson @AmyKNelson · 35m
cops are in standoff on Canfield telling people to go home; they're refusing ... a car FULL to brim of people drove by taunting cops. tense
Amy K. Nelson @AmyKNelson · 47m
watching. residents come out of their homes w hands up and they are lined up like a firing squad on Canfield road #ferguson
Amy K. Nelson @AmyKNelson · 55m
A young man flees just as assault of tear gas begins #Ferguson http://instagram.com/p/r01M5gMsip/
Amy K. Nelson @AmyKNelson · 57m
Fire started in the Delwood market police tell us.
Amy K. Nelson @AmyKNelson · 1h
on the front line, they fight back and return tear gas #fearguson http://instagram.com/p/r00toJssh4/
Amy K. Nelson @AmyKNelson · 1h
what are they looking for? watching a huge squad of officers surround a house and they are arguing w residents on Canfield #ferguson
Amy K. Nelson @AmyKNelson · 2h
cops: "shots fired west Florissant and chambers. crowd running." #ferguson
Amy K. Nelson @AmyKNelson · 2h
street where Mike Brown was shot an influx of officers head in; some sort of standoff #ferguson http://instagram.com/p/r0wpSqMsrw/
Amy K. Nelson @AmyKNelson · 2h
can't get back in there cops threatening everyone w arrest they keep bringing in more reinforcements #ferguson
Amy K. Nelson @AmyKNelson · 2h
Another journo threatened, this time it was livestreamed, on http://argusradio.com #ferguson http://instagram.com/p/r0vP8Bsso9
Clip of police in Ferguson shouting at cameraman: "get the fuck out of here [...] or you're getting shot with this!" …
_________________________________________
Robert Cohen @kodacohen
Photojournalist, St. Louis Post-Dispatch
Robert Cohen @kodacohen · 31m
Where's the LOVE? #Ferguson #MikeBrown
Robert Cohen @kodacohen · 34m
Woman helped over a wall to escape tear gas in #Ferguson #MikeBrown
:large
Robert Cohen @kodacohen · 22m
Protestors flee scene after marching toward police command center, tear gas flying in #Ferguson #MikeBrown
Robert Cohen @kodacohen · 23m
Protestors flee scene after marching toward police command center, tear gas flying in #Ferguson #MikeBrown
Robert Cohen @kodacohen · 31m
Cassandra Roberts gassed, helped by strangers in #Ferguson #MikeBrown
Robert Cohen @kodacohen · Aug 17
A member of the Peacekeepers yells "No pictures!" as she blocks the view of a photographer. #Ferguson #MikeBrown
____________________________________________
Lewis E. Reed@PresReed
Father of 4 great kids, husband, public servant, life long democrat, proud St. Louis City resident, President of the Board of Aldermen
Retweeted by Lewis E. Reed
Charles Jaco @charlesjaco1 · 6m
Now shots around Canfield, down West Florissant from separate police scene at Chambers. Several instances of gunfire tonight, none from cops
Lewis E. Reed @PresReed · 1h
Not a lot of chants of #MikeBrown from the people who remain. More just general unrest. Nowhere near as tense as before.
Lewis E. Reed @PresReed · 1h
I assume something similar to leave now . #Ferguson.
Lewis E. Reed @PresReed · 2h
Can't make out commands on speaker in #Ferguson
Lewis E. Reed @PresReed · 2h
#Ferguson right now. PD Appear to have removed gas masks. Hope that's a good sign pic.twitter.com/RyVZaw7XZU
Lewis E. Reed @PresReed · 2h
Asking people to go home and be safe. Riot geared PD moving
Lewis E. Reed @PresReed · 2h
At the corner of W Florissant & Chambers. Flash bangs from PD. Some families separated, trying to reconnect. #Ferguson
Lewis E. Reed @PresReed · 2h
People are leaving #Ferguson. Peacekeepers helping direct
____________________________________
Tef Poe/FootKlan@TefPoe
Bungalo/Universal Music Group Distribution recording artist.. featured in XXL, Unsigned Hype Source Magazine. Worked w/Killer Mike, Royce Da 5'9, I-20, GLC
Tef Poe/FootKlan @TefPoe · 43m
The tear gas came about out the blue a woman was grazed by bullet and things spiraled out of control
Tef Poe/FootKlan @TefPoe · 4m
Every single cop out there knows this is about protecting one of their own
Tef Poe/FootKlan @TefPoe · 4m
They're running the community into the ground and smearing Mikes name in the name of defending Darren Wilson
Tef Poe/FootKlan @TefPoe · 7m
This is all being done to uphold the oath they know damn well he's guilty right now it's all about protecting the oath
Tef Poe/FootKlan @TefPoe · 11m
Ferguson did all of this to protect a guy that's clearly guilty but they can't break the oath
Tef Poe/FootKlan @TefPoe · 12m
The black captain is basically the new escape goat for all of their major fuck ups
Tef Poe/FootKlan @TefPoe · 13m
The police no longer have any power over the black community in Ferguson it's a total shit show
Tef Poe/FootKlan @TefPoe · 26m
I'm speaking the real .. Kids have misplaced energy police are itching to shoot now at the slightest reasons
Tef Poe/FootKlan @TefPoe · 27m
No horse with this but it's time to organize impact full actions in Clayton the honeymoon was cool now let's get busy
Tef Poe/FootKlan @TefPoe · 28m
The dogs are gonna come out the gas is gonna come out .. It happened in the 60s and it's happening now so stand with us and help teach them
Tef Poe/FootKlan @TefPoe · 29m
Bring ppl they respect to the table it's time .. To get physical
Tef Poe/FootKlan @TefPoe · 30m
Tactically sit down and explain to there kids how we can win without them becoming moving targets
Tef Poe/FootKlan @TefPoe · 31m
Invite these kids to the table to talk or the insanity will continue
Tef Poe/FootKlan @TefPoe · 31m
We get that and that's why we're here the entire force is rogue now stand with us and combat it the right way
Tef Poe/FootKlan @TefPoe · 32m
We understand the police are bastards
Tef Poe/FootKlan @TefPoe · 33m
It's time to wake up
Tef Poe/FootKlan @TefPoe · 34m
None of you mugs are actually sitting down with the true ground level organizers leave the church and lead in the streets at night please
Tef Poe/FootKlan @TefPoe · 35m
Like flat out? Showing up getting these kids turned up to shoot at the cops and then flying back to your home city is Wack!!'
Tef Poe/FootKlan @TefPoe · 38m
I'm not voting for none of you mugs next election and I will do everything I can to make sure the local hip hop community demonizes you
Tef Poe/FootKlan @TefPoe · 39m
It's time to move the protest off of West flo so our kids can stop being mobile targets for the police
___________________________________
Patricia Bynes@Patricialicious
Democratic Committeewoman of Ferguson Township in St Louis County in MO. A delegate for MO's 1st Congressional District.
Retweeted by Patricia Bynes
Christian Lacroix @_itsvelvet · 1h
we've had monks fly in from india. we've had gaza freedom fighters sending support in the midst of their OWN war. and we're still confused?
Retweeted by Patricia Bynes
John Butler @NewsDirKMOX · 1h
Amnesty International taking "unprecedented” steps in Ferguson. Amnesty crews on the ground now, never deployed inside U-S.
Retweeted by Patricia Bynes
Malcolm Johnson @admiralmpj · 16m
@chriskingstl @WarOnFerguson There are four forces here: Local Peaceful Protesters. Looters. Folks who want to fight cops. Cops.
Patricia Bynes @Patricialicious · 48s
Police in riot gear at The Mobile on Chambers and W Florissant #Ferguson http://twitpic.com/eacbto
Patricia Bynes @Patricialicious · 11m
3 SWAT trucks on corner of W Florissant and Chambers #Ferguson
Patricia Bynes @Patricialicious · 24m
He is telling me what just happened on Chambers. This is a war zone for real #Ferguson
Patricia Bynes @Patricialicious · 24m
Picked up a guy he needs a ride to his car #Ferguson
Patricia Bynes @Patricialicious · 27m
The Dellwood Market on Chambers has been looted. SWAT just pulled off and people are going back in O_O #Ferguson
Patricia Bynes @Patricialicious · 29m
So the action is on Chambers by my spot #FERGUSON
Retweeted by Patricia Bynes
Sandor Clegane @Trap_Jesus · 1h
Real shit, if you not from here...you need to go home man. People not from here coming and fucking shit up for us. We have to live here.
Patricia Bynes @Patricialicious · 54m
Drop off good. It is too dangerous for 2 young black men to walk around the neighborhood because streets r blocked off
Patricia Bynes @Patricialicious · 1h
Found 2 guys that need to get home. I'm dropping them off #Ferguson
Patricia Bynes @Patricialicious · 1h
It is pretty quiet out here other than the sound of a chopper and the occasional, "Turn around"
_____________________________________
Sandor Clegane@Trap_Jesus
Sandor Clegane @Trap_Jesus · 47m
Out of towners, if you come here...it's not about Mike Brown. This is about something way bigger in the St. Louis Metro Area.
Sandor Clegane @Trap_Jesus · 56m
I just want to live, man.
Sandor Clegane @Trap_Jesus · 56m
I could've stayed in Baden for this.
Sandor Clegane @Trap_Jesus · 59m
My mom moved me out here from the city and I thought it was the promised land. Now it's all crumbling.
Sandor Clegane @Trap_Jesus · 1h
Real shit, if you not from here...you need to go home man. People not from here coming and fucking shit up for us. We have to live here.
Retweeted by Sandor Clegane
Charles Jaco @charlesjaco1 · 1h
St Louis County PD says none of the 7 arrested last night are from Ferguson. "Some may" be from out of state. Dellwood Market now on fire.
Retweeted by Sandor Clegane
Bobby Scmedium Shirt @Vandalyzm · 2h
Cop just came to talk to us, warns us of Florissant. People are shooting. Folks have been stabbed and cops are being shot at on Chambers.
Sandor Clegane @Trap_Jesus · 2h
I don't want to live here anymore. I give up.
Sandor Clegane @Trap_Jesus · 3h
I don't see a way any of this can end well. I might have to pack my bags.
Sandor Clegane @Trap_Jesus · 3h
RT @sarahkendzior: Eyewitness told me last nights Molotov at the chop suey was thrown by white anarchist group. Been going on all week.
Sandor Clegane @Trap_Jesus · 3h
I don't know about the reports of Molotov cocktails..but I do know there was a shooting. That's enough reason for the crowd to be broken up.
Sandor Clegane @Trap_Jesus · 3h
This ain't what I wanted.
Sandor Clegane @Trap_Jesus · 3h
You got protestors...then you got the looters..then you got those who just wanna be out there and seen..then you got celebrity opportunists.
__________________________________________
Yamiche Alcindor@Yamiche
@USATODAY national breaking news reporter who also covers social issues such as criminal justice and human trafficking.
Yamiche Alcindor @Yamiche · 9s
Johnson said authorities are looking into other ways to calm crowds. He wouldn't go into detail about what things they were considering
Yamiche Alcindor @Yamiche · 28s
Johnson said he had to ratchet up police presence tonight. "We had to act to protect lives and property." #Ferguson
Yamiche Alcindor @Yamiche · 1m
Johnson said protesters created makeshift barricades to stop police from going into certain areas #Ferguson
Yamiche Alcindor @Yamiche · 1m
Johnson said McDonald's employees had to lock themselves in a storage room around 9:20 pm because store was being overrun. #Ferguson
Yamiche Alcindor @Yamiche · 2m
Johnson "pre planned" acts of aggression happened tonight--shooting at police, throwing Molotov cocktails and looting of several stores
Yamiche Alcindor @Yamiche · 4m
According to police, 7 or 8 people were arrested tonight and in some cases face charges of failure to disperse. #Ferguson
Yamiche Alcindor @Yamiche · 5m
Johnson just said two to three people were injured tonight including someone who was shot around 8:25 pm.
Yamiche Alcindor @Yamiche · 1h
Police have blocked multiple roads as things seem to have died down. Hearing police are going to have a presser #Ferguson
Yamiche Alcindor @Yamiche · 22m
Police have blocked multiple roads as things seem to have died down. Hearing police are going to have a presser #Ferguson
Yamiche Alcindor @Yamiche · 33m
Things just got a bit quieter in #Ferguson but police armored vehicles still present
Yamiche Alcindor @Yamiche · 50m
Curfew has started and I just heard gunshots. #Ferguson
Yamiche Alcindor @Yamiche · 52m
Police telling people to go home. Two minutes before curfew. #Ferguson
Yamiche Alcindor @Yamiche · 53m
Police are urging people go home. Officers now have gas masks on and protestors are refusing to leave
Yamiche Alcindor @Yamiche · 55m
Police telling protestors to go home but people are not leaving. Five minutes before curfew goes into effect. #Ferguson
Retweeted by Yamiche Alcindor
Ryan J. Reilly @ryanjreilly · 1h
We've got a SWAT team moving into confrontation on street where #MikeBrown was shot. #Ferguson
Yamiche Alcindor @Yamiche · 1h
Bryan Jones said he felt safer running toward gun shots than police "That tells you the world is horrible." #Ferguson
U.S. broke terrorist siege of 100,000, who turned out to be 4000, who were actually 1000
. . . the dead they were worried over disappeared from the mountains as well.
Yep, they announced today they rescued from 'genocide' 50,000 to 100,000 or so Kurds who made the 10 mile walk north over the border led by Syrian fighters, and it's now 'unlikely' they'll need to drop any more food for the remaining civilians on the mountain because it appears they live there, but 'thousands' more will still need help.
'Of those still there, as many as half appeared to be permanent residents or did not want to leave . . . Of those who still wanted to go, 90 per cent were leaving by truck, the assessment team found.'
But their airstrikes did break the siege by the Islamic militants with about half the targets connected to the humanitarian mission and it will require much more aggressive bombing from the U.S. to break the siege of Sinjar and end the humanitarian crisis the U.S. now says is unlikely.
'Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said late Wednesday that the situation was no longer as bad as anyone thought. There are now only about 5,000 civilians on the mountain, and they are in "better condition than previously believed," according to Hagel's statement.'
All of that progress, no doubt due to the 130 'advisers' they just sent to 'assess' the humanitarian crisis that the only 20 or so Special Forces they actually sent to the mountain to evaluate the rescue (floating several inches above the soil, per the president's order that they not put boots on the ground) declared a success. Now "the majority" of the 129 military advisers they deployed to Irbil to help plan aid operations for the rescue of the non-existent refugees on the mountain will soon depart Iraq.
'U.S. officials believe that reports of U.S. airstrikes (not necessarily actual airstrikes, but airstrikes in the south) and the food drops gave Yazidis who had fled to the mountains (to the north) confidence that they could safely leave.'
"We're going to be working with our international partners to provide humanitarian assistance to those who are suffering in northern Iraq wherever we have capabilities and we can carry out effective missions like the one we carried out on Mount Sinjar without committing combat troops on the ground," Obama said in a statement.
'Rear Admiral John Kirby, a Pentagon spokesman, declined to say whether and where any future U.S. air strikes in Iraq might take place, but said Obama had authorized the use of strikes to protect U.S. personnel anywhere in Iraq.'
'On Thursday, some of the most senior U.S. intelligence experts on terrorism briefed reporters in detail on the Islamic State group. They described a battle-hardened, well-funded terrorist organization that is bent on governing the territory it has seized in Syria and Iraq while also encouraging attacks in Europe and the United States.'
"The fighting is very heavy at times and the Americans have helped with some airstrikes, but there have not been many," said Hamid, a militia commander who was one of hundreds of Syrian Kurds who crossed into Iraq to help battle the Islamic State near Sinjar. He agreed to speak but asked that only his first name be used.
On a break back in Syria, where he was reached by phone, Hamid said U.S. bombing strikes had provided only limited assistance.
"They helped us clear a path for the refugees, but it will not be enough to remove Daash from the area," he said, using the disparaging Arabic acronym for the Islamic State. "With more bombings we could liberate Sinjar and they could all go home."
Mission accomplished.
*satire* (text in 'italics' from actual reports)
sources for this bigtree special report:
Obama says Sinjar siege broken, some personnel to leave Iraq
Obama says Yazidi mission in northern Iraq accomplished
Obama: No Iraq rescue; further airdrops unlikely
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/55865591
130 More U.S. Troops to Iraq...There's Always Going to be an Excuse - This is Classic
. . . escalation.
I don't know that the President is slowly ratcheting the military presence in Iraq deliberately, with full knowledge that was going to be the end result of his first handful of troops. Maybe he's sincere that the mission he first envisioned and sold to the American people just happened to change so dramatically from defense of the embassy; directing and training Iraqi troops; to ordering direct attacks from our own warplanes.
Thing is, he's either hopelessly naive about the course of deployments into the middle of the civil strife of nations divided within themselves; he may indeed be malleable and easily manipulated by the pack of Bush-era hawks and dinosaurs in the Pentagon and his intelligence agencies; or he's just a goddamn liar.
Why should anyone believe anything he says regarding military deployments and activity in Iraq? He either is too ignorant to understand what he's committed the U.S. to in that country; or he's just plain bullshitting us.
After all, it's not as if this is some new reality that was somehow unspoken by opponents of the original plan to re-insert American troops there . . . and he's still calling them 'advisers.' Special forces deployed in a war zone aren't 'boots on the ground?' What, does he think... that they're floating in mid-air?
We've been played for fools, and anyone who supports this incremental escalation will have no room to argue when this escalation implodes in our faces. Give the military and the CIA an inch and they'll take a mile.
The Kurdish civilians have had an incredibly tragic experience. No one looking at their plight should be sanguine or indifferent to their plight. But the U.S. has no business re-introducing military forces there. We've done more than enough damage to their country. I'm not just talking about the 'shock and awe' of Bush's scatterbombing; I'm not just talking about the mass detentions without charge or trial -or the torturing and renditions.
I'm talking about the blowback - the counterproductive effect of our troop's mere presence which has already been demonstrated beyond any doubt to fuel and foster more resistant violence than it's able to put down.
Is there any more convincing measure of the folly of supporting this than the very fact that nothing our forces have done so far there has caused the military to assert that we're making any progress at all in putting down what they first called a rag-tag handful of insurgents? Don't tell me that more troops are the answer. Did a full scale occupation under Bush protect and defend civilians there any better?
Did we miss the horror of civilian killings all around our occupying troops under Bush; all with orders to attack and kill opponents at will? Did we miss the Iraqi family members who lined the river every day to watch the steady flow of dead and bloated bodies in the sad and awful expectation that they could identify one as their own kin?
Is there any more proof of the utter ignorance of a unilateral, escalated U.S. deployment than the virtual silence from the vast majority of the former 'coalition of willing' partners in our opportunistic imperialism?
Damn this president for taking our country back into war in Iraq. Damn him.
President Obama, left, meets with National Security Advisor Susan E. Rice on Tuesday Aug. 12 -Pete Souza
15 hours ago -John Kerry Says U.S. Doesn't Plan to Send More Troops to Iraq
Aug 12, 2014, 10:06 PM - US Sends 130 More Troops to Iraq
Amnesty Intl: "This is not the Bush administration, this is torture happening under Obama"
(I took this down last night in GD to make room for the Williams death reports - posting it here to keep it for reference)
Amnesty Intl: "This is not the Bush administration, this is torture happening under Obama"
Noah Shachtman ?@NoahShachtman 1h
US concealed evidence of troops' war crimes as recently as last year, according to a brutal new Amnesty Intl report. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/08/11/amnesty-us-concealed-troops-war-crimes-in-afghanistan-as-recently-as-last-year.html …
____ The U.S. military has systematically covered up or disregarded “abundant and compelling evidence” of war crimes, torture, and unlawful killings in Afghanistan as recently as last year, according to a report by Amnesty International published today in Kabul.
The human rights organization alleges that the U.S. military has routinely failed to properly investigate reports of criminal behavior and, in some instances, tampered with evidence to conceal wrongdoing. On the rare occasions when servicemen are held to account, the report found that the compromised military justice system seldom secured justice for the victims of enforced disappearances, killings, and abuse that included torture.
“President Obama has admitted that ‘we tortured’ people in the past—but this is not the Bush administration, this is torture happening under Obama,” said Joanne Mariner, the author of the report.
While torture and other abuses by the CIA and the military were sanctioned by the Bush administration, Obama entered office vowing to end such practices. There have been a number of prosecutions and punishments of military units that have committed crimes and atrocities in Afghanistan under Obama, but Amnesty says the White House has to do more to ensure his policy changes are respected in the field.
read more: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/08/11/amnesty-us-concealed-troops-war-crimes-in-afghanistan-as-recently-as-last-year.html
related:
AmnestyInternational ?@AmnestyOnline 20m
#Afghanistan: No justice for thousands of civilians killed in #US /NATO operations http://bit.ly/1owxqyG #humanrights
The families of thousands of Afghan civilians killed by US/NATO forces in Afghanistan have been left without justice, Amnesty International said in a new report released today. Focusing primarily on air strikes and night raids carried out by US forces, including Special Operations Forces, Left in the Dark finds that even apparent war crimes have gone uninvestigated and unpunished.
“Thousands of Afghans have been killed or injured by US forces since the invasion, but the victims and their families have little chance of redress. The US military justice system almost always fails to hold its soldiers accountable for unlawful killings and other abuses,” said Richard Bennett, Amnesty International’s Asia Pacific Director.
“None of the cases that we looked into – involving more than 140 civilian deaths – were prosecuted by the US military. Evidence of possible war crimes and unlawful killings has seemingly been ignored.”
The report documents in detail the failures of accountability for US military operations in Afghanistan. It calls on the Afghan government to ensure that accountability for unlawful civilian killings is guaranteed in any future bilateral security agreements signed with NATO and the United States.
Amnesty International conducted detailed investigations of 10 incidents that took place between 2009 and 2013, in which civilians were killed by US military operations. At least 140 civilians were killed in the incidents that Amnesty International investigated, including pregnant women and at least 50 children. The organization interviewed some 125 witnesses, victims and family members, including many who had never given testimony to anyone before . . .
read more: http://www.amnesty.org/en/news/afghanistan-no-justice-thousands-civilians-killed-usnato-operations-2014-08-11
Pres. Obama Pledges Support for a New Iraqi Leader (my own view fwiw)
New York Times World ?@nytimesworld 1mObama Pledges Support for a New Iraqi Leader http://nyti.ms/1oEBMnu
EDGARTOWN, Mass. — President Obama said Monday that Iraq had taken a “promising step forward” in forming a more inclusive government even as Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki appeared to resist efforts to replace him as the country’s leader.
Speaking briefly to reporters from his vacation home on Martha’s Vineyard, Mr. Obama did not mention Mr. Maliki but pledged his support for Haider al-Abadi, the man chosen to succeed him. And Mr. Obama vowed to step up his support for a new government in its intensifying fight against Sunni militants.
“There will be difficult days ahead,” Mr. Obama said. “We stand ready to partner with Iraq in its fight against these terrorist forces.”
The president spoke as the president of Iraq, Fuad Masum, named Mr. Abadi to succeed Mr. Maliki as prime minister. It was less than a day after Mr. Maliki demanded in a television address that the nation’s army come to the defense of the constitution and his right to stay in the office he has held for eight years.
Mr. Obama has previously said that support for the Iraqi government is dependent on a new government that includes all of the country’s factions to unify against the militants. In his remarks Monday evening, Mr. Obama praised Iraq’s leadership for beginning the process of building that government.
“Today, Iraq took a promising step forward in this critical effort,” Mr. Obama said.
read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/12/world/middleeast/obama-pledges-support-for-a-new-iraqi-leader.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&smid=tw-nytimesworld&_r=0
here's a sightly different account w/new info:
____ The Iraqi political system is in crisis, with the country's parliament electing a new prime minister to replace Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who is so far refusing to leave office. It's not clear whether or how Maliki, who has taken an increasingly authoritarian turn during his eight years as Iraq's leader, might try to cling to power. The Obama administration has said very clearly that it's ready for the next Iraqi government. Here's what we know so far about the crisis and where it could lead Iraq next.
The crisis began late Sunday, at 12 am Baghdad time: the deadline for Maliki to form a new governing coalition in the country's parliament. When he missed the deadline, he announced that he would be staying on as prime minister anyway. On Monday, Maliki's own party voted for a new leader party leader: a member of parliament and former finance minister named Haider al-Abadi. He will legally become the next prime minister if he can form a government within the next 30 days. Iraq's president, whose position is otherwise largely ceremonial, gave Abadi the authority to do that. All of this bring Abadi very close to replacing Maliki as prime minister. But it's still unclear whether Abadi will be able to form a new government — or whether Maliki will let go of power peacefully.
This political crisis started because Iraqi parties couldn't agree on forming a government. Maliki's State of Law coalition won a plurality of Iraqi seats in the April elections, but he couldn't figure out how to put together a coalition large enough to get a governing majority by the Sunday midnight deadline. Part of the problem here is factionalism: Iraqi politics are divided along largely sectarian lines. Sunnis, Shias, and Kurds mainly vote for sectarian parties (Maliki is part of the Shia majority), and there's also competition even inside the sectarian blocs. Abadi, just appointed to replace Maliki as the leader of the State of Law coalition, is now trying to form his own governing majority, which would make him prime minister.
Maliki is now legally obligated to step down. After Maliki's Sunday night announcement that he planned to stay on as prime minister, his own party took that choice away from him. About 50 members of parliament from the State of Law coalition — over half of the party's total numbers — voted to nominate Abadi for Prime Minister rather than Maliki. That means Maliki no longer controls the largest bloc in parliament, and therefore no longer has any claim to be prime minister. Legally, he is required to abdicate in favor of Abadi once Abadi puts a government together. So far, Maliki hasn't.
Maliki wants to stay on. Maliki was very clear on this point in his speech on the Sunday midnight deadline: he's staying in office. Legally, he can stay on as caretaker prime minister, unless Abadi forms a new government, in which case Abadi will legally replace Maliki as prime minister. If that occurs, then one of three things happens: Maliki is persuaded to step down peacefully, he's ejected by force, or he manages some long-shot political compromise that allows him to stay.
Abadi was appointed to form a new government. Abadi, a reasonably popular Shia politician (who's open to overt Iranian intervention against ISIS), has been charged by Iraqi President Fuad Masum to form a new government. A rough count suggests Abadi has the support of about 128 members of parliament, which is still short of the 165 needed for a majority . . .
read more: http://www.vox.com/2014/8/10/5989367/maliki-iraq-coup?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=voxdotcom&utm_content=monday
my own view, fwiw:
. . . I personally didn't agree with the autocratic way Maliki lead the Iraqi government or military, but I don't feel comfortable at all as an American talking trash about what the Iraqis should do with their political system of government.
That said, let me talk a bit of trash . . . I think that now the Iraqi parliament has spoken, the onus is correctly on Maliki to respect that process; just as he expected them to as he challenged the Iraqi president and parliament to name a leader last night. They've acted according to their political process, as he demanded, and he should respect their choice and adhere to Iraqi law and their constitution.
That said, I don't believe it's the business of our government to dictate what happens in their political system and I'm not at all comfortable with the way our government and Pres. Obama appeared to be pressuring Maliki to step aside, even before their parliament had spoken.
It's further aggravated by the fact of our military forces and their direct action within Iraq, and our continued exercise of our 'counterterrorism mission within Iraq and the region which, in many instances, is at odds with sizable portions of the Iraqi population.
I DO think, so far, the President has been as careful as he can be with his rhetoric while exercising his very dangerous and destabilizing military deployment and strikes in Iraq. That's not to say that I don't view his military posture and activity as destabilizing and counterproductive to even his own stated goals. But I do see that he's walking a careful line with his rhetoric and that's appreciated by me, somewhat.
I'd like to see the U.S. disengage our military forces completely from Iraq, but I don't believe that's going to happen anytime soon. I fully believe Pres. Obama's military ambitions go far beyond rescuing Kurdish civilians off a mountain; or even are limited to preserving or defending the Kurdish state.
His stated intention in Iraq is to pursue his 'war on terror' from Iraq and I'm certain that we'll see much more military activity there which is removed from just focusing on ISIS/ISIL. That, I believe is unsustainable, counterproductive, and dangerously destabilizing, as history and even his own intelligence agencies are indicating today.
So, I hope for the best, and intend to continue to protest U.S. military action and ambitions in Iraq. I hope for the safety and welfare of the Iraqi people, above all other concerns. I think opposing, at least. unilateral, U.S. military action there is an integral part of that.
Scooter Libby/Plame Leak Figure, Robert Grenier Offers Questionable Pushback to Torture Report
____ Robert L. Grenier is a longtime CIA officer who served as the CIA's top counter-terrorism official (2004-2006) and was fired from that position by CIA director Porter Goss. (Wiki) Later, Grenier joined Kroll, Inc., as Managing Director. In 2009 he was appointed Chairman of ERG Partners, an independent financial and strategic advisory firm focusing on the security and intelligence sectors . . .
The London Sunday Times reported (way back when) that Grenier lost his job with the CIA "because he opposed detaining Al-Qaeda suspects in secret prisons abroad, sending them to other countries for interrogation and using forms of torture such as 'water boarding'.
In early 2006, Grenier was identified in court documents in connection with the ongoing CIA leak grand jury investigation and charges against I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby. Grenier told Libby on June 11, 2003, one month before the leak of Valerie Plame's CIA identity, that Ambassador Joseph Wilson's wife worked for the CIA and was involved in arranging Wilson's 2002 trip to Niger.[3] Libby claims to have forgotten about the conversation.
On January 24, 2006, Grenier testified in the trial of Vice President Dick Cheney's former Chief of Staff on perjury and obstruction of justice charges, telling jurors Lewis Libby asked him for information about Joseph Wilson's investigatory trip to Niger on June 11, 2003, and that he reported back to Libby about Wilson's wife's involvement in the trip, as well as Wilson's wife's employment by the CIA, later on June 11. Grenier did not, however, mention Plame's name to Libby, which appeared in a column by Robert Novak a month later.more
Today, apparently, Grenier is taking on the task of pushback to the Senate torture report . . . Marcy Wheeler ([link:Grenier then launches a more interesting implicit threat — that CIA will stop doing what the President demands under Article II.|emptywheel] is her handle on her excellent blog), who closely followed the Scooter Libby trial and was a reliable set of eyes and ears for many locked out of the hearing, has offered her view of Grenier's efforts:
emptywheel ?@emptywheel 54m
Folks, 1st 1,000 words of Grenier's piece are lies. But well worth reading the last 1,000 -- read my post for why: http://www.emptywheel.net/2014/08/11/cias-torture-pushback-gets-more-artful/ …
August 11, 2014 | By emptywheel
____ I well remember when Robert Grenier testified at Scooter Libby’s trial. His performance — and it, like most of the witness testimony — was a performance. But I was more intrigued by the response. Even the cynical old DC journalists were impressed by the smoothness of the performance. “You can tell he was a great briefer,” one journalist who had written a book on the CIA said.
Today, he takes up the role of bogus pushback to the Senate torture report, complete with all the false claims about the report, including:
--SSCI should not have relied exclusively on documents — which, if true, is an admission that millions of CIA’s cables are fraudulent and false
--The claim that members of the Gang of Four were briefed earlier and more accurately than even CIA’s own documents show them to have been
--SSCI — and not CIA — made the decision that CIA officers should not testify to the committee
--That a report supported by John McCain and Susan Collins is a Democratic report (Grenier also claims all involved with it know history from history books, not — as McCain did — from torture chambers)
--That the CIA cables exactly matched the torture depicted on the torture tapes (see bullet 1!), and that CIA’s IG reported that, both of which are false
But perhaps Grenier’s most cynical assertion is his claim — in a piece that falsely suggests (though does not claim outright) that Congress was adequately briefed that Congress’ job, their sole job, is to legislate, not oversee.
A second, related reason would be to build support for comprehensive legislation — that is what Congress is supposed to concern itself with, after all — to remove any of the interpretive legal ambiguity which permitted coercive interrogation to be considered in the first place, and ensure it never happens again.
It is a cynical move, but given the rest of his argument, the part that I find compelling, necessary.
Because Grenier warns Dianne Feinstein that her attack on the Presidentially authorized counterterrorism methods of the past will chill President Obama’s preferred presidentially authorized counterterrorism methods — drone strikes — going forward . . .
I told you CIA would invoke Obama’s drone strikes to limit the damage of the torture report . . .
Grenier then launches a more interesting implicit threat — that CIA will stop doing what the President demands under Article II (authority to fight ISIS covertly). . .
please read more (I'd post more of this here if I thought it was proper): http://www.emptywheel.net/2014/08/11/cias-torture-pushback-gets-more-artful/
. . . what Marcy Wheeler is describing contains so much nuance and knowledge that I'm not sure can be translated effectively into some pat defense or opposition to whatever we want to oppose about the administration's efforts in handling the Senate investigation and report.
It's a clear and good analysis of some of the mind-numbing details surrounding the torture report which will scatter advocates and opponents alike in all sorts of directions; likely that dissonance is someone's deliberate design. At any rate, this is a fascinating read by Marcy which I heartily recommend and am grateful to emptywheel for an interesting and compelling account of this one pushback on the Senate torture investigation findings for anyone interested in this report's release and process of eventual accountability.
Just who is in charge of the political process in Iraq - Iraqis or the Obama administration??
The Guardian ?@guardian 33mUS slaps down Iraqi PM Nouri al-Maliki after he accuses president: http://gu.com/p/4vjf8
The United States has thrown its weight behind Iraqi president Fuad Masum after he was accused by prime minister Nouri al-Maliki of violating the constitution.
As security forces massed in the capital Baghdad, the under-pressure Maliki made the surprise announcement on state television on Sunday night that he would be filing a complaint against Masum.
“I will submit today an official complaint to the federal court against the president of the Republic for committing a clear constitutional violation for the sake of political calculations,” said Maliki.
But US state department spokeswoman Marie Harf said in a statement: “The United States fully supports president Fuad Masum in his role as guarantor of the Iraqi constitution.
“We reaffirm our support for a process to select a prime minister who can represent the aspirations of the Iraqi people by building a national consensus and governing in an inclusive manner,” she said, echoing an earlier comment made on Twitter by deputy assistant secretary of state for near eastern affairs Brett McGurk.
“We reject any effort to achieve outcomes through coercion or manipulation of the constitutional or judicial process.”
read more: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/11/us-iraqi-maliki-accuses-president
____ How does the United States get to claim some high ground in their manipulation of the Iraqi political process; claiming they know better what the 'consensus' of Iraqis is than the Iraqis do themselves? They can dictate the process just by virtue of this deployment of our military and still accuse Iraqis themselves of 'manipulation?
What right does the U.S. have to dictate the political process of a sovereign government in Iraq? How is a lawsuit in the Iraqi courts 'manipulation?' How is the U.S. military action and insistence not 'coersion?' It's Orwellian, in the extreme.
What the U.S. really wants is capitulation by the Maliki regime to the wishes of the U.S. occupiers who have their warships and planes poised to strike wherever and whenever they please in Iraq. It's no wonder there's strong and active resistance among many Iraqis to U.S. involvement.
One moment we're enabling Maliki into power by way of a devastating military occupation - the next, we're demanding that autocrat's removal behind the renewed force of our re-occupying, threatening military. Where's the democratic process behind all of that? How is demanding that Maliki just step down respecting the Iraqi democratic process?
This is a outrageous display of U.S. imperialism.
The President's ability to wage limited war appears almost unlimited. . . and then some
My wife and I were shaking our heads (up until dawn) about the almost utter futility in stopping a president from waging the type of limited airstrikes that President Obama has authorized in Iraq, not only to defend Kurdish civilians besieged in the mountains, but also for the other defenses he outlined in his order.
Outside of the protection and humanitarian defense of the Yazidi sect, President Obama has also defined the defense of our military deployments in Baghdad and Irbil as areas where he intends to utilize airstrikes, if he deems necessary. The targets he's defined are the insurgent combatants known as ISIS, or ISIL.
I take the view that the U.S. has forfeited our moral authority to wage war in Iraq by our previous conduct there with the opportunistic and devastating military misadventure Bush perpetrated which ran roughshod over our own constitution and over the rights and safety of Iraqis, as well.
To many Iraqis subject to our bombs and airstrikes launched from planes, warships, or drones, they are scarcely less pernicious or dangerous than the violence from any insurgent group attacking them. I'll certainly allow that our nation's violence exercised there under President Obama is demonstratively or likely less devastating to the general population than Bush's violent attacks; or than the current combatant insurgents featured in his justifications for deploying troops. However, in their counterproductive nature - fostering and fueling even more resistant violence in response - I believe that's a matter of degree, but not effect.
I've been mulling over ways in which someone in America who shares my concerns would be able to, collectively, of course, in our legislative system, prevent the President from launching the types of limited airstrikes that he's outlined in Iraq. I've concluded that it's almost impossible.
The authority the President, as commander-in-chief has in his reach to wage limited war (which, by most definitions would cover airstrikes) is effectively unchecked. Even if Congress specifically prohibited a president from initiating such attacks, a president could advantage his actions with authorization gleaned from several different authorities.
First, observe that whatever authority President Obama is considering in his re-deployment of troops into Iraq; more importantly, his order for airstrikes to defend American positions and personnel in Baghdad, Irbil, and in defense of the besieged Kurdish civilians, is an amorphous and shifting affair.
The initial deployment of troops could be justified, as he did, as protection of embassy personnel. It gets trickier when defining the goal of military 'advisers' and their support troops, but that action could be authorized under a broad and certainly expansive reading of the original Iraq AUMF; or under the nebulous and autocratic declaration of our 'national security interest which can be either a short term concern or a long-term one which is speculative and subjective to whatever view there is of a future threat.
There isn't any argument that the President has the ability and need to protect and defend American military and civilian personnel he's inserted into Iraq. There's certainly room to argue that defense of troops deployed is a self-serving, self-perpetuating rationale, but there's no doubt that he has that authority.
It gets a bit more complicated when considering the actions of military advisers who he's ordered to help Iraqi forces direct attacks against whoever they deem a threat to Iraqi or U.S. interests in the country. The authority for that military deployment and activity could come from a number of Bush-era authorizations to war in Iraq, and elsewhere, which haven't expired or been voted out of existence by Congress; most notably, Bush's use of force authorization specific to Iraq which is still in effect.
Or, that authority could be drawn from the nebulous 'national security' concern I described above. At any rate, President Obama really hasn't spelled any of that authority out for Americans, or our legislature to measure or approve.
from June 12 Roll Call:
When asked about getting Congress’s permission to take action, (WH spokesman) Carney was noncommittal.
“We are in active consultation with members of Congress,” he said.
He demurred when asked directly about the 2002 authorization to use military force (AUMF). An administration spokeswoman, Caitlin Hayden, told Yahoo’s Olivier Knox in January “the administration supports the repeal of the Iraq AUMF.”
Hayden emailed CQ Roll Call late Thursday and to reiterate that what she said then remains in effect.
She declined to comment on what authority Obama would have to act if he decided to launch a strike.
Roll Call again, June 18:
Pres. Obama met for about an hour in the Oval Office with McConnell, Speaker John A. Boehner, R-Ohio, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.
Pelosi told reporters that she agreed that the president has all of the authorities that he needs in the authorizations to use military force passed by Congress previously.
“All of the authorities are there. That doesn’t mean I want all of them to be used, especially boots on the ground,” she said. “But I definitely think the president has all of the authority he needs by dint of legislation that was passed in 2001 and 2003.”
She appeared to be referring to the authorizations to use military force passed after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks and the 2002 authorization to use force in Iraq. Neither of those authorizations have expired, although the official White House position is that the Iraq authorization should be repealed.
It's a bit slippery for the president to give lip service to the idea of repealing an authorization to war that he may well be advantaging authority from in Iraq. Still, he actually has as much authority to wage war as Congress allows, so it's fair enough to take that position.
Still, even though a formal declaration hasn't been made, the administration does appear to be leaning to the CIC defense of their authority to launch strikes.
Bernadette Meehan, a spokesperson for the National Security Council, August 08, 2014:
"As to the domestic legal basis, we believe the President has the authority under the Constitution as Commander-in-Chief to direct these actions, which are consistent with this responsibility to protect U.S. citizens and to further U.S. national security and foreign policy interests. Specifically, the protection of U.S. personnel and facilities is among his highest responsibilities as Commander-in-Chief, and given the threats that we see on the periphery of Erbil, he has authorized the use of targeted military action."
"Similarly, we believe that there is an urgent humanitarian challenge that further poses a threat to U.S. interests. As I said this rises to the level of a potential act of genocide when you have an entire group of people being targeted for killing, and you have a population of the size that is on Mount Sinjar that is threatened with starvation as one option, or, as the President said, coming down that mountain and potentially being massacred by ISIL."
"If we do end up taking airstrikes, we would have to do a War Powers report consistent with how we respond when the United States is engaged in hostilities. So we have been consulting Congress for the last several weeks about Iraq, generally. And then throughout the day today we were able to reach a good number of members and leaders of Congress to advise them of our thinking and then of the President’s decision. And again, if there are airstrikes taken, we will comply with our responsibility to file a War Powers report."
In the case of limited war, or limited airstrikes as President Obama has ordered in Iraq, his authority, as commander-in-chief, appears unlimited.
If he relies on the Bush-era authorizations already in place - the one specific to Iraq, and others related to the broader 'war on terror' - in a legal sense, his actions never need be scrutinized by Congress for approval or disapproval.
If he relies on his constitutional powers as commander-in-chief - albeit under the War Powers Resolution enacted by Congress in 1973 and intended as a limiter on a president's ability to wage war without Congress' approval; passed in response to Nixon's secret bombing of Cambodia - he has, at his disposal, demonstrated and historically upheld, broad powers to wage limited airstrikes without any weighing in from Congress at all.
Under the WPR, under Article Two of that act, "in the absence of a declaration of war, the president must report to Congress within 48 hours of introducing armed forces into such circumstances and must terminate the use of U.S. armed forces within 60 days unless Congress permits otherwise."
That provides more than enough opportunity for a president to launch the types of airstrikes President Obama has ordered in Iraq without relying on any of the Bush-era documents; with virtual impunity.
I'm obviously dismayed that there doesn't seem to be a lever for the public, or for our elected representatives and senators, to automatically or quickly restrain any president from warring on a limited basis. I'm certainly dismayed over our ability to legally or legislatively restrain President Obama from waging limited war, or otherwise, in Iraq.
That's the way it goes. Notwithstanding a major uprising by Americans in opposition, it's highly unlikely that there's anything that can or will be done to actually cause President Obama to limit or halt his military ambitions in Iraq.
I believe that, no matter what one's view of his actions are there, it should be a concern just how easily a president is able to wield the devastating force of our military abroad. So much for trying to figure a way out of this mess.
Profile Information
Gender: MaleHometown: Maryland
Member since: Sun Aug 17, 2003, 11:39 PM
Number of posts: 85,996
