Don’t worry, this won’t be real long. I’m too hyped on everything that’s going on now to stay patiently at the computer for too long. But I have to get some of these opinions down in print and out there to be read. The situation seems to change almost hourly, but as nearly I I’m able to tell, the latest is more or less this–

–Maduro has been charged with a variety of crimes(he’s probably guilty of most of these offenses, actually) involving drugs and firearms–this took place in a federal court in NYC(Hello, Mayor Mamdami, just what you’d expected, right?)

The US has threatened, mostly with the President doing the talking, that the US will “run” Venezuela. How this running is supposed to happen is not at all clear, but he seems to have in mind doing more or less whatever it takes and is “not afraid” of boots on the ground

–Trump has also warned Columbians the US might have its sights on aspects of their sovereignty and likewise Cuba and Greenland!!(Now how did Greenland get involved?–Oh, yes, Trump started threatening them several months ago)

_Without a high degree of specificity, Trump has indicated the US military forces are likely to play somewhat of a role here, though he isn’t too certain(take him at his word on this–he likely is not just uncertain, but may be without a clue of what to do)

Trump’s ideas of transitioning to a new Venezeula government are confusing and likely confused and have certainly not been thought out well–is this to be an invasion and occupation or what? “nation building” maybe?who knows?

The reaction of other Venezuelans outside of their country, particularly those in the US, has been enthusiasm–no doubt Maduro was a bad and lawless ruler and they are understandably glad their country is rid of him–Most Latin American countries are understandably perturbed and angry and fearful about what the US(Trump, really)will do next–This is somewhat hypocritical in some cases but understandable given the long US history of “gunboat diplomacy” and other mistreatment of our southern neighbors. Argentina is the big exception–they also are glad Maduro is gone

–Our European allies were, perhaps strangely, subdued about this for a day or two–My guess is they didn’t like the action but also didn’t want to be in direct opposition to our policy-but in the last day or two they have showed signs of becoming impatient with Trumpantics, and seem to be slipping toward an oppositional position

–Our worst adversaries–(Russia, China, North Korea and Iran, mostly)have been handed a terrific issue here and are going to take advantage of it.–They are condemnatory of the US action without limit or qualification–This is extremely hypocritical of Putin given the past nearly four years in Ukraine, but this won’t stop him–We have given our enemies an excellent issue, a club with which they can whack us for the global public

But what is the basis of of this and what is the truth about the Constitution, the power of the President in military matters, and efforts by the US Congress to put some limits on presidential power here? For that we need a little bit of history

I think you all know whatever you need to about how we drifted into getting to be supporters of South Vietnam before the war had really began there. After the assassination of President Diem(South Vietnam)and of JFK, both in November, 1963, things got even tougher than they had been and our involvement became more obvious

In early August, 1964, the North Vietnamese Navy made an attack on US Navy ships off their coast. What the rights and wrongs are here I won’t bother with, let’s just note the fighting took place. A day or two later(Aug 4) the US Navy reported 2 more attacks on US ships by the North Vietnamese. President Johnson ordered the Navy to go back and hit the North Vietnamese. It later turned out that the first two reported attacks actually happened more or less as reported, but the second pair almost certainly did not. There may have been bad communications or an intent to distort the truth or both.

Whatever, I think it is undoubtedly true that LBJ believed(correctly)the first attacks took place and he may well have believed or assumed that the second ones were real too AT THE TIME he gave the order. If so, he seems to have learned the truth later.

NOW–we all know that the US Constitution says only the Congress has the power to declare war. But we haven’t had a declared war since 1945 so we can more or less ignore that for now. It also asserts civilian control of the military and gives the President leadership power in being commander-in-chief.

I don’t think it was ever(usually, anyway)assumed that a president had to get congressional approval on any and every military action he ordered, but it was clear he was not to make serious long term commitments on his own. For a long time few serious situations occurred which tested this issue This began to get to be more difficult with Korea and Harry Truman who sent troops there to fight and called it a “police action.” Truman was, in my opinion, likely right in resisting North Korea and in refusing to use the word “war”, in both cases for diplomatic/strategic reasons. But it left confusion to develop for the future.

This is more or less where things stood when the Vietnam mess fell into LBJ’s lap as he succeeded JFK. The fighting in the Gulf of Tonkin(off North Vietnam)was his first big test. LBJ addressed the nation on TV the night of Aug 4 explaining what had happened in the Gulf of Tonkin and what his response was. He also asked for a vote from Congress supporting what he did.

Congress acted swiftly and on Aug 7 they passed the now rather infamous Gulf of Tonkin Resolution. which authorized the President to use “all necessary measures” to defend freedom and US forces in Southeast Asia. The only dissenters were two Democratic Senators, Wayne Morse of Oregon and Ernest Gruening of AL.

Now it appears on the surface that gave the President the right to do about whatever he wanted to in Viet Nam, but many members of Congress, particularly liberal Senate Democrats, came to regret their action, some sooner than others. It should be noted, of course, that in every action of this type some people are going to make assumptions about it and the assumptions may differ. LBJ used it as an overall blanket “OK” for introducing hundreds of thousands of US troops to Vietnam and on paper is looks as if he had Congressional backing. But it is doubtful if every member of both Houses meant he was voting for anything the President did relating to Vietnam.

Though no one should be too confident of stating exactly when the Viet Nam War began for the US, it was obviously after this. I’d put the date in the Spring-Summer of 1964 when the first large allocations of troops took place. And almost immediately there began a debate that lasted for the rest of the war and in some ways has lasted up until today.

This is at least marginally relevant to Trump and his foreign policy, because he has gone way beyond anything any former President did in this type of matter. The attack on Venezuela was without formal Congressional approval. The House Armed Services Committee apparently didn’t even know about it ahead of time. But my point is that Trump appears to have gone, or at least be leaning toward going, way beyond LBJ and the Tonkin issue. He is threatening Venezuela’s neighbor, Columbia. He has spoken with hostility about Mexico without very specific threats. He speaks of fixing things in Venezuela with no very clear explanation of how this would happen or what it would take. Perhaps most outrageous of all, he has threatened Greenland.

This latter threat, which he mentioned as a possibility early in his second term(see my article from about a year ago on this)is the most ludicrous and over-the-top of all. It has nothing to do with Latin America, it just got tossed into the pot with Trumps plans in an opportunistic way. Since Denmark is officially the owner of Greenland, (though the latter has been granted very widespread self-government)an attempt to absorb it into the US would be an attack upon Denmark in a serious way and therefore an attack upon a fellow NATO ally.

I find it hard to belive I am typing this or even now that Trump and his people would actually try a takeover of Greenland without the consent of both the Greenland power structure and the overseeing(and financially supportive) Danes. But one never knows. With people like Miller and Hegseth you have to be careful. Sometimes they have the courage of their foolish convictions and their borderline psychotic views of the world. Trump is part of this and while he may or may not be as removed from reality as some of his cronies, he shows little inclination to slap them down or shut them up when they say something as loony as this would be. But Miller clearly said on TV last night that Greenland should be part of the USA. Such thinking, which sounds like something from an SNL satire, now is taken semi-seriously by some in Washington. As for me, I don’t believe it will happen but …

Well, I’ve said perhaps more than enough. But I wish — at the risk of being too obvious perhaps– to say this. Look back at the Tonkin Resolution. Read the above which I have written again or better yet review Tonkin on Wikipedia. Look what happened with LBJ who was clearly saner, a better politician and a far better man than Trump. If Congress had tried to put some restraints on him in 1964 the US might not have divided its self as viciously as it did over the next decade or so. Far more importantly, thousands of Americans, Vietnamese and others who died in the war would have survived.

So my plea to the US Congress is this–be careful with this guy. Do NOT encourage him to try to make the US an indirect ruler of several Latin American countries. Most certainly do not let him mess with NATO. The Danish Prime Minister just said that an attempt to inappropriately to influence Denmark’s and Greenland’s freedom would mean “the end of NATO.” It may be that Trump wouldn’t care. He has never liked our European connections much and obviously is no big NATO supporter. So maybe this insanity about Greenland is OK with him. It is not OK with our NATO allies and should not be with the US Congress. So my plea to both Houses is simply DO NOT let anything like this happen. Don’t pull a “Tonkin” and leave any doubt that the President has responsibilities to fulfill before committing troops or taking precipitous action of any kind in foreign affairs. The US, the West, and all who love independence and individual freedom deserve to be protected, not ignored.