« Previous · Home · Next »

LTC Paul Yingling Hits It Out of the Park

By Townie 76

In this months Armed Forces Journal International, LTC Paul Yingling in an article entitled "The Founder's Wisdom" writes eloquently on the relationship between the Constitutionally defined powers of Congress and the President regarding the military and recent United States History. Many shan't agree with his prescription for restoring the balance, but it should be read nevertheless.

As the U.S. commits additional forces to Afghanistan, Americans would be well-served to return to our constitutional system of war powers. The burdens of fighting in Afghanistan cannot and will not be shouldered solely by those in uniform today. Many of the soldiers who will fight in Afghanistan have not yet entered high school, and many of the workers who will pay for this conflict are not yet born. No war policy can succeed unless the American people are committed to the wisdom and justice of the conflict, and prepared to bear the burdens necessary for victory. America’s Founders understood this principle well, and gave us a system of government to keep us both safe and free. In practice, this form of government provides for a deliberative process that is slow, inefficient, messy and noisy. However, these inconveniences are a small price to pay to ensure that we choose our wars wisely and fight them intelligently and vigorously. We have paid a terrible price for ignoring the Founders’ wisdom, and in doing so have gained neither safety nor freedom. However, the great advantage of our system of government is that it allows us to learn from the past and do better in the future. Perhaps Madison should have added an eighth article to the Constitution: “When all else fails, read the directions.”


February 9, 2010 03:53 AM    History

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://op-for.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/2525

Comments

We didn't ignore the Founders wisdom.

In the days after 9/11 'everyone' want revenge, retribution. 'Everyone' wanted to make it clear to every other nation that this kind of attack on the United States would provoke a response.

There was public debate, there was private debate. There was debate, at great length, in congress.

Trial balloons were launched and shot down. Op-ed opinion pieces were written, re-written, published, re-published.

In the end, congress VOTED, and the president ACTED. Then, the politics started.

Return to our Constitutional war powers? We never left them.

Townie 76: Here is the reply I sent in response to this comment.

Despite you might believe, I do not consider Joint Resolution 114 to be a Declaration of War, rather an authorization to use the Armed Forces of the United States to accomplish two specific goals:

"SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.
(a) AUTHORIZATION.—The President is authorized to use the
Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary
and appropriate in order to—
(1) defend the national security of the United States against
the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and
(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council
resolutions regarding Iraq."

And when compared with the Joint Resolution declaring war on Japan, you will note that Congress in its ambiguity allowed the members to have room to wiggle later in our adventure in Iraq.

"Whereas the Imperial Government of Japan has committed repeated acts of war against the Government and the people of the United States of
America:
"Therefore be it
"Resolved, etc., That the state of war between the United States and the Imperial Government of Japan which has thus been thrust upon the
United States is hereby formally declared; and that the President be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to employ the entire naval and military
forces of the United States and the resources of the Government to carry on war against the Imperial Government of Japan; and to bring the conflict
to a successful termination all of the resources of the country are hereby pledged by the Congress of the United States."

While it may have been debated, while the pundits pundified, the reality is Congress has not exercised its Constitutional Responsibilities since World War II. Yingling was spot on.

By the way so you have no doubts I have served in Iraq, so this is not merely an academic discussion for either Yingling or myself.

Skandia Recluse   ·  February 10, 2010 12:40 PM

Good points all. I do wish that the percentage of military veterans in the Congress had not declined so. They would have a better appreciation for the impact of the decisions they make. I further wish that more Democrats and Republicans cared more for their country and less for their personal careers and pocketbooks.

I'm just a jaded old fart, just a bit senile, er, I mean cynical in my advanced years.

Thank you Marines for your service to our nation.

Vance Hall   ·  February 11, 2010 12:28 PM

Post a comment

Potential comment conditions listed here. Oh, and you may use basic HTML for formatting.





Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)


Please enter the security code you see here