1.Order assassinations ofThat's just off the top of my head. Other presidents have engaged in the odd, opportunistic war: Polk's invasion of Mexico in 1846; the so-called Spanish-American War under McKinley--from April to August, 1898. It is of course probable that the majority of those powers had been exercised under previous Executives, but had been camouflaged or, if discovered, strenuously denied.a) foreign citizens of any nationality, and2. Initiate wars of aggression/expedience;
b) US citizens, at home or abroad
3. Operate secret, off-shore, military tribunals outside Constitutional safeguards and civilian supervision;
4. Conduct torture ona. civilians in combat zones and in 'detention.', and5. Enforce indefinite detention without due process, and absent conviction;
b. 'enemy' combatants, both in the field and behind the lines (a completely spurious designation, btw)
6. Authorize searches/seizures of private records without warrant;
7. Reject the rule of habeas corpus;
8. Ignore, when inconvenient, the extant domestic, legal restrictions on the exercise of military power, and
9. Expressly repudiate codices of international treaties forbidding prisoner abuse, etc.
The difference, to me, which is revelatory upon consideration, is that apparently there no longer is any need for disingenuity; much the way that other totalitarian/authoritrian States eventually abandon pretense (and the expense) of the velvet glove and disclose the iron fist.
Dr. Woody hopes you will all welcomes the SEVEN BILLIONTH PERSON to the 21st Century on Earth. The EIGHT BILLIONTH is due in about 10-12 years, TEN BILLIONTH by 2050 or so? It hit SIX BILLION, in Aug, '99, adding a billion in just under 12 years. It's arrant fucking madness.
It was Malthus who, now infamously, noticed that the correlation between population and food availability followed the same path, regardless of the species; that, field mouse or mule deer or human, when there was more food, the population grew. Thus, in Malthusian terms, at least, feeding the hungry only means making MORE of them.
The USA, with 5% world population, consumes about 25% of the world's non-renewable resources. To elevate the standard of living of every person on earth to that enjoyed by all but the utterly destitute USer would require the resources of no fewer than TWO MORE earth-identical planets.* If they were close enough to be of any conceivable use to us, we should be able to see 'em even in daylight, and guess what. I just went out and looked, and...they aren't there. Nope. Not even one. Sorry.
Remember all those folks who used to brag how we were so strong, we'd never succumb to that "race to the bottom" that some folks were warning about, 20-30 years ago? Our conceit was that "they needed us." And for a while they did. But our five percent of the population has grown relatively less prosperous as we were "tricked" into globalism and the race to the bottom--remember "the great sucking sound?" Listen close, you can still hear it. Now, there's more "prosperity"--Walmarts--elsewhere, and the prosperity of Murkins is relatively less important.
The anthem for our time: Wake'N'Bake, babies, this is pretty close to the real deal. Go down dancin'!
(*: Unsourced, may be apocryphal.)