The 1989 invasion of the tiny central American country of Panama on the orders of President George H.W. Bush is actually one of the more minor, less costly examples of the reckless pursuit of an aggressive foreign policy by a series of presidents from both major parties. Ever since World War II politicians have twisted the role of Commander-in-Chief beyond all recognition, claiming the unilateral authority to attack other countries. The consequences of ignoring the constitutional requirement that their be a consensus of the American people on the necessity of going to war, expressed by a congressional declaration per our Constitution, has resulted in a virtually unbroken string of military adventures ever since. From President Truman’s invasion of Korea through President Obama’s invasion of Afghanistan it’s difficult to name a single year any time in the last half-century that we didn’t have troops in harm’s way somewhere in the world. As with every other instance of politicians finding constitutional limitations on their power so inconvenient that they have circumvented (or simply ignored) them, you have to ask: “So, how’s that working out for you?”
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
More on foreign policy:
Tags: CIA, commander-in-chief, constitution, declaration of war, drug war, foreign policy, non-intervention, Noriega, panama, self-defense
