Rush to Baghdad

Rush to Baghdad
by Ted Lang, Associate Editor

September 20, 2002

Columnist Ted Lang One definition of insanity offers that it is the unabated continuation of doing precisely the same thing over and over and expecting different results. Rush Limbaugh and other "conservative" pundits and observers offer that President Bush doesn't need to request Congress to declare war on Iraq. Of course he doesn't! No despotic nation ever needed Congress to declare war, and that includes US!

Shortly after September 11, 2001 - on September 14th to be precise, the Congress passed a resolution authorizing President Bush to take actions against persons, organizations, and nations that he adjudicates solely as connected with that despicable, cowardly act. But the resolution is unconstitutional and therefore unlawful. It falls short of being illegal because our representatives in our national legislature passed it. Nevertheless, the resolution is unconstitutional.

Citing precedents as well as the actions of previous presidents, "conservatives" such as Mr. Limbaugh make the same mistake that perpetuates the very unaccountable and out-of-control government that they amass fame railing against. And the precedents cited include all the military actions and Clintonista incursions since the end of WWII. The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, the War Powers Act and such justified some of those actions. Again, these "acts" and "resolutions" are in violation of the Constitution because the power to make war resides only with the Congress as established in Article I, Section 8.

If Bill Clinton, Tom Daschle, Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Brady, or George Bush don't like Article I, Section 8, all they need to do is initiate an amendment to the Constitution rescinding the offending section, and getting We the People to agree via ratification by the joint and several states.

Sure that's difficult - it's supposed to be! That's why the Constitution was such a big deal to our Founders. That's why declaring war is such an awesome undertaking - it has a tendency to kill people, and isn't supposed to be used to steal another nation's oil reserves!

Additionally, as pointed out by attorney J.L. Chestnut, we cannot declare war on things. That precludes "a person or persons unknown," terrorism, poverty or drugs. We can only declare war on what is normally and generally identifiable as an enemy nation.

Now if those seeking an Iraqi regime change cannot justify doing so constitutionally, then they resort to United Nations' resolutions, or to pointing out Iraq's numerous violations thereof. How many UN resolutions has Israel violated? Yet now we're going to cite the supremacy of an international group as legitimizing our unilaterally unprovoked attack while disclaiming our national sovereignty?

Allowing commanders and generals of other nations to command our troops is constitutional? The 1991 UN resolution allowed only for the expulsion of Iraqi military units from Kuwait - it didn't authorize capturing or harming Saddam. If taking out Saddam wasn't justified back then, how could this resolution be justification for initiating a regime change now?

Then there is the disquieting fact that Saddam was justified in attacking and occupying Kuwait due to its oil incursions and its former existence as a part of Iraq. Saddam's "aggression" was sanctioned by the US State Department before he acted.

So now we've boiled it down to one remaining issue: Do we trust George Bush? Well do ya? Has he prosecuted Clinton and Reno, or protected them? Has the FBI told the truth about terrorists, or protected them? Has Bush rescinded Clinton's unconstitutional executive orders, or created yet another to protect him?

Perhaps this is why the Founders worked so hard on our Constitution. Perhaps this is why they would rather have us live by a rule of law instead of depending upon the whims of an individual, which includes the ease at which such an individual can declare war. Relying upon either a beneficent Republican or Democrat makes US no different from a people in a monarchy hoping for a compassionate and just king. The Constitution prevents an errant rush to judgment, or Baghdad. ***

Photo of Columnist Ted Lang courtesy of the author