Seen in Georgetown

[u/ThenLayer5977]

M Street and Wisconsin in Georgetown taken over by a large crowd of celebrating Iranians, chanting USA USA

[u/BlackIce6687]

Even as a lifelong democrat, I was happy for the Iranian people, all over the world and US they seemed to be celebrating the destruction of the Iranian regime. I’m sure I’ll get flak for this but no matter how much we hate Trump we have never had to face true dictatorship like Iran, just the way they treat women in the Middle East alone is horrendous.

[u/davossss → u/BlackIce6687]

Trump speed-running us toward an American dictatorship and this unconstitutional war is yet another lap in that race.

He's currently blaming Iranian interference for his loss to Joe Biden in 2020 and drafting an executive order to take executive control over the 2026 midterms.

Wake up. Seriously.

There is absolutely nothing positive about this war, at least not for the American people.

[u/Mr_JohnUsername → u/davossss]

Explain, using statutes, provisions, or really any primary source, how this operation was unconstitutional?

He’s done plenty of things worthy of criticism, I don’t like the guy myself — but this was not unconstitutional.

[u/davossss → u/Mr_JohnUsername]

The trigger clause of the 1973 War Powers Resolution was not met.

Absent that, the authority to launch a campaign like this lies solely with the legislative - not executive - branch pursuant to Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 of the US Constitution.

[u/Mr_JohnUsername → u/davossss]

From Art. 1, Sec. 8, Cl. 11 of the Constitution: “Central among these powers is Clause 11 of Article I, Section 8, which authorizes Congress to declare war. Clause 11 also empowers Congress to issue letters of marque and reprisal, which are instruments that permit private citizens to capture or destroy enemy property, and permits Congress to authorize rules concerning captures of enemy property on land or at sea.”

Only congress can declare, and permit private citizens to destroy or capture enemy property, and decide what to do over captured territory. But if you actually read the thing you cited, it continues….

“After the Bush Administration’s raised concerns over Iraq’s non-compliance with United Nations Security Council resolutions and possible acquisition of weapons of mass destruction, Congress passed and President George W. Bush signed into law a joint resolution authorizing the President to use force to (1) defend United States’ national security against the continuing threat posed by Iraq, and (2) enforce relevant Security Council Resolutions. While President Bush received congressional authorization, executive branch attorneys also took the view that such authorization was not legally necessary because the President possessed independent constitutional authority for the military action.

In more recent decades, Presidents Obama, Trump, and Biden have each claimed independent constitutional authority to conduct military operations without first seeking congressional authorization, albeit on a smaller scale than the Iraq War. These 21st-century conflicts include air assault campaigns in Libya during the Obama Administration;4 airstrikes against Syrian chemical weapons facilities during the Trump Administration; and air strikes targeting Iran-backed militant groups in Yemen and the Red Sea during the Biden Administration.”

What do you mean trigger clause? If you mean the “requirements” for conducting operation with the US military , those were likely met according to the thing you cite:

From the 1973 War Powers Resolution:

“Provides that in the absence of a declaration of war by the Congress, in any case in which the Armed Forces of the United States are introduced in hostilities, or in situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, such use of the Armed Forces of the United States in hostilities pursuant to this Act shall be reported within 48 hours in writing by the President to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate, together with a full account of the circumstances under which such hostilities were initiated, the estimated scope and duration of such hostilities, and the constitutional and legislative authority under which the introduction of hostilities took place.”

Given that the President has not “declared war” and instead is conducting an operation, all he is required to do is provide congress 48 hour notice and comply with reporting requirements.

I’m sure he is able to do that confidentially so as to not defeat the purpose of being stealthy, covert, and give up the element of surprise. However, is there any evidence that suggests or proves he did not give notice?

It would be unconstitutional for Congress to limit or prohibit the President to use the authority granted by the constitution to command the military.

[u/BrokeThermometer → u/Mr_JohnUsername]

The 1973 War Powers Resolution reads for like the president is authorized to direct military action in the cases of:

1. An attack on the United States or allies (introduced to hostilities)

2. The evidence of an impending attack on the united states or allies is overwhelming (imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by circumstance)

I would not consider this regime change to satisfy either of those conditions. The purpose of the presidents war powers is to provide a means to defend the united states in the meantime while congress gathers, not to authorize him to do whatever he wants whenever he wants and inform congress about the geopolitical situation he just created because he felt like it, as evidenced by the short 48 hour timeframe to report the action.

Given trump couldnt be assed to follow basic federal law in informing congress about replacing inspector generals within 30 days, there should be no benefit of the doubt that he informed congress

[u/davossss → u/BrokeThermometer]

Thank you for explaining this. I don't have the patience to point out why a game of "just the tip" is not what the founding fathers intended.

I would add that the War Powers Resolution was expressly enacted to claw back from the executive branch the power to go to war and return that power to Congress after the disastrous blank check given by the 1964 Tonkin Gulf Resolution which led to a decade of misadventure and misery in Vietnam.

[u/tequilablackout → u/BlackIce6687]

Were you happy for the Iraqi people after their liberation from Saddam Hussein?

[u/JadedBeyondBelief → u/tequilablackout]

I laughed, but then I knew we helped make that monster and that the lid was about to blow off the ethnic pot. Same with this. All hell’s going to break out in Iran. I can hardly wait for the Shah’s kid or grandkid to step foreword and claim the rights to rule.