Thursday, December 22, 2011

This "always and everywhere" war against terrorism that tramples on the rule of law only allows the enemies of America

Almost ten years after the 9 / 11, in May this year, most of the House of Representatives U. S. voted to give President Obama - and all future presidents - the authority over the war that Congress gave President Bush two days after the attacks of 9 / 11: a president no longer has to demonstrate a link through 11.09 or even any specific threat to the United States prior to use military force anywhere in the world of a terrorist suspect can be found, even within the United States.

The vote in the House tried to put the nation in permanent war footing at a time when policymakers raised otherwise. Osama bin Laden was killed days before the vote. As Defense Secretary, Leon Panetta, as soon confirm that they were "the scope of the strategic defeat of al Qaeda." The Obama administration threatened to veto the bill, told the House that the power Executive and had all the war powers he needed. And America is exhausted by the high cost in blood and treasure of the two wars began with the stated purpose of fighting against terrorism. However, instead of stop to think it was wartime, catch of the nation against terrorism, the House of Representatives voted to expand. If the project is approved by the House conference complete (so far, the Senate n has not aligned with the House), which would be the largest single transfer of power of the executive uncontrolled war in American history.

why so many people in the house is ready to give such powers of war and unlimited general direction?

The answer lies in the incessant drumbeat of some of our political leaders to force America into a military response


terrorist act, or even anywhere in the world, including, far from any battlefield. It is not only some members of Congress who have embraced a global war against terrorism. Since 9 / 11, both Bush and Obama administrations have argued that the United States are involved in a global conflict against terrorists armed vaguely defined and undefined entities "associated forces". Most of the specific policies that were followed are indefinite military detention and deadly attacks against civilians, far from any conventional war theater.

Over the past decade, America has become one of invoking international legal instruments on the right to use lethal force against the indefinite detention of terrorism suspects outside the battle area. If you also increase the militarization of our fight against terrorism, our nation may become a pariah law at the expense of these efforts. In order to fulfill their obligations under national and international key allies rightly refused to extradite terrorist suspects to detention in the United States military or military prosecutor, the treatment of security required is performed only in our system Criminal Justice.

Find best price for : --Guantánamo----Bush----Obama--


Blog Archive