The United States is a global superpower, and its military trains for war in every domain. During my years as a military educator, I saw American officers wrestle with any number of scenarios designed to challenge their thinking and force them to adapt to surprises. One case we never considered, however, was how to betray and attack our own allies. We did not ask what to do if the president becomes a threatening megalomaniac who tells one of our oldest friends, Norway, that because the Nobel Committee in Oslo refuses to give him a trophy, he no longer feels “an obligation to think purely of Peace” and can instead turn his mind toward planning to wage war against NATO.

As my colleague Anne Applebaum wrote today, Donald Trump’s threatening message to the Norwegian prime minister should, in any responsible democracy, force the rest of the U.S. political system to act to control him. The president is talking about an invasion that would require “citizens of a treaty ally,” as she put it, “to become American against their will,” all because he “now genuinely lives in a different reality.” And yet neither Congress nor the sycophants in the White House seem willing to stop him.

*🎁 link

MBFC
Archive

  • RedRibbonArmy@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    15 hours ago

    We clearly need another impeachment tool. Perhaps if 1/2 of all state legislatures vote to impeach, then the president can be impeached at a continental congress. Each state would elect two representatives.

    • ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      15 hours ago

      In normal countries this is done by the judiciary. In US this is unthinkable because the judiciary is as politicizes as the legislature. Not only are the top judges politically nominated but you even have elections on lower court levels with Republican and Democrat candidates clearly stating their allegiances. In normal countries judiciary is a parallel branch where judges promote other judges to higher offices so they are not tied to any party. Maintaining the rule of law is in their interest because otherwise they are out of power so they can be trusted with judging politicians. You can’t have politicians judging other politicians because their goal is absolute power, not rule of law.

      • Ithral@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Lower court judges are strange, some states they are appointed by the governor then voted out by the people if they disapprove, others they are elected, and still others are handled without voter input.