The article discusses the modern implications of U.S. presidential war powers, referencing historical precedents while criticizing current leaders for prioritizing political survival over constitutional obligations. It highlights tensions growing between U.S. and Iran, and the dangerous rhetoric surrounding potential regime change, along with the perceptions of public response to these conflicts. The author suggests that calls for diplomatic solutions are overshadowed by a prevailing sentiment that once military action begins, debate and dissent die down.
However, who is leading whom by the nose is no longer relevant. And God help us, outrage over the president's usurpation of Congress's war powers never has sounded more thin and impotent.
From The New York Times: There will be either peace or there will be tragedy for Iran, far greater than we have witnessed over the last eight days, he said.
Collection
[
|
...
]