tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1950785292046403853.post8825299740176124455..comments2024-01-17T16:20:10.878+01:00Comments on Mercury Mail: Hermes MSafirihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00286610519438841267noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1950785292046403853.post-20388787289806314172011-03-30T22:22:24.738+02:002011-03-30T22:22:24.738+02:00"In the expected scenario of a Soviet first s..."In the expected scenario of a Soviet first strike, there would be only minutes for the president to authorize counterstrikes and no time for constitutional niceties. In that sense, it was argued fairly persuasively that the Constitution had become irrelevant to the military realities facing the republic."<br /><br />Essentially, in any democracy, the Constitution is the enabling social contract that defines it; a people's breath that gives it life. It is the set of rules and regulations which bind the elected to the people, as it is the document that manifests their consent in all matters affecting them. It is the singular node that transfers power from the people to the elected.<br /><br />For the Constitution to be made irrelevant, in any given instance under any democratic dispensation, alters the power chemistry that makes democracy functional. Where it is agreed that time is of the essence, for say a nuclear attack and whereas "congressional niceties" would gravely affect reaction time to it, the proper thing to do would be for Congress to study the given situation/situations and amend the Constitution appropriately to allow for the necessary speed and response.<br /><br />There can be no lawful excuse for abridging or ignoring constitutional provisions in any given democracy. This is to say, no matter the given urgency, resolution or treaties, all are without exception subject to the Constitution or the social contract with a people. It cannot be the other way around. It is the paramount title deed which says this country belongs to a people and must be governed in accordance with their wishes and expectations.<br /><br />For every time the Constitution is degraded, power is unlawfully transferred from its traditional base; the people, to other political groups or institutions. To tinker with any Constitution, without a people's consent, is democratic taboo and forbidden. Nothing touches the Constitution of a people without their say so or that state of governance and society ceases to exist.<br /><br />It is outrageous therefore to conclude "In that sense, it was argued fairly persuasively that the Constitution had become irrelevant to the military realities facing the republic." It is the Constitution that ought to define military realities facing any given Republic and it is its constitutional provisions that should allow for an appropriate response to the situation at hand.<br /><br />It is exactly for this reason that constitutional amendments are made possible. It amounts to Congressional irresponsibility and ineptitude, perhaps even abdication of duty, to ignore due process in matters of war and all other matters arising.Egoigwehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09263219499689521466noreply@blogger.com