Precedent and Rhetoric and War
September 11th, 2007Harry Reid says, “This war is the President’s war.” Republicans hear that and take offense. I shrug and say, “That’s true enough, but every unpopular War is the President’s War.” Look through history — everytime a War becomes unpopular, someone high in Congress declares it “The President’s War,” with “Mr. Madison’s War” being the most famous example but there are many others. Is it appropriate? Maybe not, but it’s historically accurate. It happens to every President with a war, even Clinton, so let’s not get too excited about it. Rhetoric is rhetoric for a reason, and while I know that everybody believes we should be “above politics,” we aren’t.
In other news, this article makes me sicker than anything I’ve read in weeks.
Russia has tested the world’s most powerful vacuum bomb, which unleashes a destructive shockwave with the power of a nuclear blast, the military said on Tuesday, dubbing it the “father of all bombs.” The bomb is the latest in a series of new Russian weapons and policy moves as President Vladimir Putin tries to reassert Moscow’s role on the international stage.
“Test results of the new airborne weapon have shown that its efficiency and power is commensurate with a nuclear weapon,” Alexander Rukshin, Russian deputy armed forces chief of staff, told Russia’s state ORT First Channel television. The same report was later shown on the state-sponsored Vesti channel.
What on Earth is the point of this? Why is it necessary? Because Putin has penis envy and is leading a nation with a thirst for blood and violence unlike any country of the last hundred years?
Oh, and hey. I’m the new copy editor of the Chicago Flame and had my first op-ed published Monday, which you can read here: The glowing elephant in the room. Enjoy!