Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Chairboy on March 22, 2003, 07:33:42 PM
-
Howdy,
Can anyone explain to me why the 'decapitation strike' didn't violate posse comitatus? Eg, wasn't it essentially an assasination attempt?
Regards,
Chairboy
-
Hussein is in the military chain of command. (my understanding)
-
Yep
Also IIRC the executive order outlawing assassination was revoked a while back.
-
correct magic.. command and control is target priority #1.. the issue was addressed by the pentagon, same answer.
funked, the executive order was never revoked. it was considered, then rejected at unnecessary.
-
Followup question, could this apply to the President of the US too? Eg, if another country had a similar prohibition on the books, couldn't it be rationalized that:
a. As Commander in Chief, the prez is part of the military chain of command,
and
b. This applies to pretty much every country?
Regards,
Chairboy
-
I think political leaders who are part of the military chain of command have always been fair game in war. Of course if a foreign nation tried to take out the US President it would be considered and act of war, and there would be a brutal response. Also there are some fairly scary command and control consequences of an attack on the POTUS which put US nuclear forces on a "hair trigger". So I think it's unlikely that a foreign government would risk it if there was a chance the origin of the attack could be traced.
As far as the USA doing this to other countries, I think it would require either the revokation of the executive order prohibiting political assassination, or a military authorization of the sort Congress gave Bush, or an outright declaration of war.
-
Thanks all for your responses!
Regards,
Chairboy
-
But it's a pretty sure bet that during the cold war both sides had the capitals targeted. If it's a nuke, is it an assassination attempt? If it's MAD, is it a moot point?
Originally posted by funkedup
I think political leaders who are part of the military chain of command have always been fair game in war. Of course if a foreign nation tried to take out the US President it would be considered and act of war, and there would be a brutal response. Also there are some fairly scary command and control consequences of an attack on the POTUS which put US nuclear forces on a "hair trigger". So I think it's unlikely that a foreign government would risk it if there was a chance the origin of the attack could be traced.
As far as the USA doing this to other countries, I think it would require either the revokation of the executive order prohibiting political assassination, or a military authorization of the sort Congress gave Bush, or an outright declaration of war.
-
Originally posted by Arlo
But it's a pretty sure bet that during the cold war both sides had the capitals targeted. If it's a nuke, is it an assassination attempt? If it's MAD, is it a moot point?
It's an act of war either way. That's what I was getting at.
And yes capitals were targeted. The whole idea was to be able to destroy the enemy's command and control and communications (and launchers of course) before he could order retaliation. Otherwise you don't have a weapon, you have a doomsday machine.
-
well sure.. have any countries authorized military force against the united states? please list the nations that have declared a formal state of war against us..
item: the strike against Iraqi command and control does not fall under the Executive Order Prohibition against Assisination because the US congress authorized the use of military force against iraq last october.
Any nation that declares war on the US is certainly within 'legal' bounds to mount a military strike against the American Command Structure.
Of course, I don't need to paint a picture of the response that such an attempt would elicit..
Note.. Husseins attempt on Bush Sr.'s life in kuwait some years back was not an attack on our command structure. that was just a cheap assisnation attempt. Bush was a private citizen at the time.
-
Posse Comitatus = the power of the county
It's where the sheriff calls up every able bodied male to hunt down felons.
I guess I don't see the connection.
-
Also I thought the Posse Commitatus Act was prohibition against using the United States Military branches in law enforcement against its own citizens. I could be wrong here but I don't think I am. I would not be surprised if there have been some really serious issues with this since Sept. 11th 2001.
-
When you're at war,I don't think you can use the term "assasination"...
Yamamoto was killed in action in WW2 by p38's hunting his transport plane...Never once heard he was assasinated.
-
Then again ... Yamamoto wasn't the Emperor of Japan.
I think you need to cut and paste some more animated gifs. ;)
Originally posted by SirLoin
When you're at war,I don't think you can use the term "assasination"...
Yamamoto was killed in action in WW2 by p38's hunting his transport plane...Never once heard he was assasinated.
-
Originally posted by Arlo
Then again ... Yamamoto wasn't the Emperor of Japan.
I think you need to cut and paste some more animated gifs. ;)
OK..You requested..:).....(BTW,Monty Python invented animated GIF's)
And...The Emperor wasn't calling the shots for Japan in WW2.
-
As far as taking out saddumb is concerned. He is a uniformed member of his military. That makes him a valid target in wartime.
The President as Commander in Chief, is NOT a uniformed member of the military. He is a CIVILIAN as nominal director of the military, not a tactical / strategic commander in the true military sense. In this regard he is considered a CIVILIAN head of state, not a valid military target.
Does this help?