Men like General David Petraeus

You can not teach at West Point without prejudice in favor of the peak belonging goal of the U.S. military, the word embodies "the Pentagon" that the holding of presidential elections, unilateral foreign policy, whether good or bad.

I think that columnist David Hoagland rightly realized that fact before writing his open comment on General David Petraeus, the Princeton political savvy supporters of the war. Nevertheless, all the generals, and professional soldiers, proponents areWar. That's what keeps them, and their warriors in the economy. Petraeus mentors, while in the United States Military Academy, taught him that was his duty to the President, his Caesar, in fact, tantamount to vary his duty to country. And this is his honor was dependent on his duty. However, I find no evidence of duty, the President of the oath by a newly appointed cadet at West Point included, but only the duty to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign andDomestically.

Duty, honor and country are the three words to convey the same meaning today as the angry cry of the Roman legions of Julius Caesar, "we are doomed to die greet you, Caesar," through the air during the Punic wars. Petraeus and others as he was taught, what the Harvard expert, said Samuel P. Huntington, as a lesson for neoconservativism that the military is the sword of Prometheus, or perhaps Damocles is, in the implementation of the political will of the federal executiveBranch.

Currently has a permanent U.S. president the power of the emperor, and, by the stroke of the pen to draw are required by law. I remember a minor 17th Century expert and essayist, Montaigne, who wrote that is emphatically: "If the legislative, executive, judiciary, are living in a person, it is a dictatorship." The U.S. military was essentially ago, originally under the control of the Congress or the Legislature placed, as shown in Article I of the Constitution of the United States.And nowhere in Article II of the President plenary authority to convey the right by writing Executive Orders, or create the luxurious way to adding signing statements to laws passed by Congress. No, the president and the executive branch, according to James Madison in the Federalist # 14, much more narrowly limited by the Constitution and human reason. Why is his opinion, was this so?

In 1789, the authors, during the constitutional convention considered filed on aRecently former revolutionary war against a tyrannical King George III. These wise founding fathers wrote the U.S. Constitution against a tyrant rises again in the form of a U.S. president. Therefore, Article I, Section 8, gave only Congress the power to declare war and to rules governing the movements of the land and naval forces. All this has had the power of a president who since 1945 has carried on the tradition, and by the refusal of Congress to exercise itsconstitutional authority. Explain the gradual politicization of the Supreme Court of the United States Constitution on executive orders has also marked the end of the Congress have contributed to the powers conferred only claim the legislature.

As a dominant imperial superpower, the U.S. is now repeating the same mistakes grave formerly of the Imperial Roman Empire has been committed, with the approval of a small majority of the uninformed American electorate. And the hubris ofreigning King George and his faithful followers Pentagon, as David Petraeus, has once again it was the United States into deadly and completely unnecessary war in Iraq, which is nothing more than another bloody Vietnam.


Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: