Dem
47
GOP
53
For the second time in about a week, the U.S. has destroyed a boat containing alleged Venezuelan drug runners/terrorists. In this latest incident, three people died.
Pretty much everything that is publicly known about this story comes from the message Trump sent out on his violence-loving social media platform:
This morning, on my Orders, U.S. Military Forces conducted a SECOND Kinetic Strike against positively identified, extraordinarily violent drug trafficking cartels and narcoterrorists in the SOUTHCOM area of responsibility. The Strike occurred while these confirmed narcoterrorists from Venezuela were in International Waters transporting illegal narcotics (A DEADLY WEAPON POISONING AMERICANS!) headed to the U.S. These extremely violent drug trafficking cartels POSE A THREAT to U.S. National Security, Foreign Policy, and vital U.S. Interests. The Strike resulted in 3 male terrorists killed in action. No U.S. Forces were harmed in this Strike. BE WARNED - IF YOU ARE TRANSPORTING DRUGS THAT CAN KILL AMERICANS, WE ARE HUNTING YOU! The illicit activities by these cartels have wrought DEVASTATING CONSEQUENCES ON AMERICAN COMMUNITIES FOR DECADES, killing millions of American Citizens. NO LONGER. Thank you for your attention to this matter!!!
He does love to use violent force, at least against certain... shades of people.
Maybe our response to this will surprise some readers, but we thought carefully about it, and we don't see a substantive difference between this and the various other military operations carried out by most of the last dozen or so presidents, in which Congress got little or no say, and civilians were killed. For example, since 9/11, U.S. drone strikes in Afghanistan, Somalia, Pakistan and Yemen, which were ordered by George W. Bush, Barack Obama and Trump, have killed between 910 and 2,200 civilians. (Note that we are open to arguments that the drone strikes are substantively different from the boat attacks; we just aren't seeing them ourselves).
Following from this, we'd say the story here is not "Donald Trump is authorizing illegal and immoral military actions, largely to fire up the base, and to distract attention from Epstein-Contra and other scandals." At least, that's not the ONLY story. We'd say the story here is that, as in so many areas, Congress has abrogated its prerogatives to the executive branch, regardless of which president/party is in control, and has not had the will/fortitude to reassert itself.
We recognize that presidents need to have at least some ability to respond quickly to certain kinds of situations, without waiting for Congress to sign off. But it seems to us that some kind of balance can be restored. Notice that Joe Biden's name does not appear in the above list; that is because he stopped the drone strikes, and limited himself to military targets (at least when using American firepower). It seems that could be a model for, say, a new War Powers Act. (Z)