A crucial yet overlooked deadline looms over the Iraq debate: Unless further action is taken, the war will become illegal on Jan. 1, 2009. Despite protestations to the contrary, Congress clearly understood that it was authorizing the president to intervene militarily when it passed its joint resolution authorizing the use of force in Iraq in October 2002. But it did not give him a blank check. It allowed for the use of force only under two conditions. The first has long since lapsed. It permitted the president to “defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq.” This threat came to an end with the destruction of Saddam Hussein’s government…. Instead, U.S. military intervention is authorized under the second prong of the 2002 resolution. This authorizes the president to “enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.” This has allowed the Bush administration to satisfy American law by obtaining a series of resolutions authorizing the United States to serve as the head of the multinational force in Iraq.
Here’s something that I’ll best most of us weren’t aware of: if nothing changes over the next few months, Our Glorious and Benevolent Leader’s © Excellent Adventure in Iraq © will become illegal on 1.1.09. This seems ironic, especially since there are people like myself who believe that the war in Iraq has been illegal, or at the very least immoral, from the inception. Given that this war was purchased with lies, deception, propaganda, and fudged intelligence, how can The Worst President EVER © possibly claim the legal authorization for this war is airtight?
As of 1.20.09, Iraq will no longer be The Decider’s © problem. That the war will officially become illegal as of 1.1.09 is probably not something that he’s concerned himself with. What’s 19 days when the war at that point will be approaching it’s sixth anniversary? This, after all, is a President seemingly accountable to no one, whose Justice Department has issued legal opinions essentially stating that a President is under no obligations to follow laws he finds inconvenient. When extra-legal behavior can be justified with the magic chant, “9.11…9.11…9.11….”, can the rule of law be held to have any meaning? This is no small question; this country was founded on the rule of law. It’s what keeps this diverse collection of regions, ethnicities, and cultures from spinning into chaos and anarchy. If a President can be deemed to be above the law, if he cannot be held accountable because he’s paid attorneys to write legal opinions that absolve him of culpability, then 200+ years of American history and legal tradition have been made a mockery.
This war may have an expiration date, and thankfully this Presidency does as well. It’s too bad that no one has the balls to hold Commander Codpiece © accountable for the lies told and the crimes committed in the run up to and conduct of the immoral war of occupation in Iraq. Thanks to Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) and Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Congressional Democrats have proven themselves devoid of anything resembling the courage of their convictions. Nice work, y’all….
NOW CAN WE IMPEACH THE LYING BASTARD??
