Outdated Intel incident regarding Yemen confirms only Congress should be waging or declaring wars.
Intel that is exactly a decade old was acted on militarily in Yemen. Of course this came with self-crippling results for the US military. However, Yemen is an Islamic Statist regime and as such is at least a latent threat to the American People. Sadly, the US troops were rushed into Yemen by the White House with no clear plan. Basically what we are seeing is the result of impulse rule by the White House. Namely, this is an example of what happens without oversight by Congress! What does that even mean? It means that only Congress has the power to do military actions and to act on intel reports.
Building a Morality for War
How can we as libertarians, people who prize freedom and liberty above all else, build a morality for war? Our own morality for the military of America or any other free societies to abide by? Broadly, my camp has a severely flawed defense policy that makes no effort to answer these valid questions. However I’m ready to mix the most relevant libertarian values into a wise morality for war! Basically, the most topical libertarian values to this post are self-defense and constitutional jobs. So how about this for a morality.
- When the US military goes to war it should only be to secure economic freedom and personal liberty for the American People.
- Securing these requires intel that is from within the same week as also-needed approval by Congress.
- Intel report must consist of all 16 intel agencies saying at very high ratios that there’s either an imminent threat or a latent one.
- Then, after the first 3 rules have been met the US military needs to do all that’s needed to total end the enemy!
- Lastly, after the enemy is ended the US needs to bring a majority of troops home while leaving a few thousand behind to grow a Laissez-faire Economy.
Let’s return to the subject!
Okay, so Yemen may be of latent threat to the American People but that does not justify acting on decade-old intel! Rather that justifies having a clear entry plan, battle plan and exit plan. One could have intel on Saudi Arabian sponsorship of terrorism and it would still have to be recent to really do anything with. Basically, the question for intel are, or should be, rather easy to ask. Firstly, how old or new is the intel we are analyzing? Also, what does this gathering prove about the subject? Even the intel agents themselves should know it is national suicide to pretend to know everything!