Archived Post
Ah yes, I remember Obama getting impeached for bombing Syria.
And for that matter, Trump getting impeached for killing Soleimani, the leader of Iran, while he was in Iraq.
this post was submitted on 22 Jun 2025
1122 points (97.2% liked)
People Twitter
7503 readers
439 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Soleimani was the commander of the Quds Force, a division of the Iranian military and high-ranking official but he wasn't the leader of Iran.
I see two outcomes:
- Congress introduces articles
- Impeached, but fails ratification in senate
or
- Congress introduces articles
- Some terrible tragedy befalls us or Israel
- Articles fail and congress backs the war full-throated
There is no version of this that ends in removal, and even impeachment wouldn't be anything more than performative outrage.
The majority of sitting representatives have been waiting for an acceptable excuse to bomb Iran for decades. The only objection any of them have is doing so without manufacturing consent from voters first, but we've already seen how this plays out with Afghanistan. They'll drum up dubious evidence of WMD's and launch their entry, and then spend 20 years trying to 'get out' while securing Iran's material resources on the way.
The only difference this time is that Iran has almost 5x the population and 100x the GDP of Afghanistan in 2001, plus an actual organized military base with proper advanced weapons manufacturing. There's a reason we've waited this long to actually do this, and it isn't because we were busy doing other things. It's because this isn't a war we can win without pulling everyone else into it (or at the very least without isolating them from global trading partners).
It's not a morbid joke to call this a WWIII softlaunch.
The problems, the House and Senate are controlled by the Russian supporting MAGA clowns. I believe Mango Mussolini has a 60 day window before he needs to end the military engagement against Iran. For the moment, a drunk, a felon and Signal App are controlling the US military.
mmmmmm
The corruption of our nation is absolute.
The president is a Nazi.
Thr people working for him are Nazis.
They are carrying out a Nazi agenda.
They are illegally starting wars illegally kidnapping Americans and illegally using our own armed forces against us.
The time for resistance is passed.
It’s time for survival.
No. No this is about the time for resistance. We shouldn't just skip that one
Exactly. I'm so tired of this doomer "we've tried nothing and it hasn't worked" stance on the Trump regime. RESIST, people!
load more comments
(2 replies)
Pretty sure it's time for FOOTBALL !!!! amirite
It’s baseball season.
What if ice is occupying your town's stadium?
They tried that shit. Dodgers told them to get fucked.
They don’t want that smoke in the dodger stadium parking lot.
Ice shows up it’ll be dangerous.
For them.
Dodger stadium parking lot is gigantic and lawless.
Ice wouldn’t make it out alive.
That’s why dodgers had LAPD escort them out.
For their own protection.
Hockey?
some type of ball
Can anyone explain what happened to the articles of impeachment that were introduced a few months ago?
Yeah lets impeach the already twice impeached president, surely third times the charm... right guys ?
/s
I think Rachel Maddow has his tax returns, WE GOT HIM
He can rape 5 year old on a press conference and won't be impeached.
i mean he DID do that but the case was dismissed when the accuser got death threats
load more comments
(2 replies)
Not happening. Next quotum
I havent seen the Dems fight for much of anything in a long time. I highly doubt they'd do whats needed to make an impeachment happen.
Because the last two impeachments were a resounding success?
We have seen impeachment means fuck all though
He has avoided impeachments with way better justifications, but sure, go ahead.
In 2001 when The US authorized use of force on Al-Qaeda that, along with The 1973 war powers resolution gave the president (as in the position of president, not just Bush) unlimited ability to bomb anyone loosely associated with Al-Qaeda in perpetuity.
It's what allowed Bush, then Obama, then Trump, and then Biden, and now Trump again, to use the military as they see fit for performing military operations against basically any state and group in the middle east.
This is sadly likely the least impeachable thing he's done in office.
The US authorized use of force on Al-Qaeda
Is that even needed? The War Powers Act
requires the president to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing armed forces to military action and forbids armed forces from remaining for more than 60 days, with a further 30-day withdrawal period, without congressional authorization for use of military force (AUMF) or a declaration of war by the United States
Congress can still be notified, and 60 days haven't elapsed.
Edit: Nevermind. I now see unless war is declared, the president requires specific statutory authorization or a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.
Why would we use force on our allies in Syria?
impeachment shmimshmeashment, i want a conviction and an escort out of the building
That ship has sailed decades ago. The US hasn't been officially at war since 1945, and the congress has for all intents and purposes gave up on that power.
The speed Congress gave up their constitutional powers to avoid repurcusions for having opinions and voting for them is crazy. But I guess being able to give yourself a raise every year for doing nothing is tempting.
The actual purpose of congress is to violently enforce capitalism by rubber stamping imperialism, policing, prisons, etc.
To be fair to the US Congress (AFAIK) no one as been formally at war since 1945 - and unless I'm forgetting anything it would actually make the US Congress the last ones to declare war on anyone.
Since WW2 everything is framed as a peacekeeping mission (when approved even if only implicitly by the UN Security Council), a civil war, helping the legitimate government in a civil war (US in Vietnam or Soviet Union in Afghanistan for example), or when every other excuse fails a pre-emptive special military operation (US in Iraq, Russia in Ukraine, Israel in all of their neighbours + Iran).
And this is a good thing. Declarations of war makes war a legitimate thing. In the past it was a noble and goodly thing to do, all of the correct paperwork has been submitted and so now it's good and proper for you to go over there and kill those people that have different uniforms.
Also a declaration of war means going from 0 to 100 on everything. There's no escalation and also no de-escalation. Probably not a good thing to instantly go 0 to 100 once nuclear weapons became a thing.
People often decry how war is no longer a legitimate thing because there's no longer declarations of war. The reality is, war never was a legitimate thing. Declarations of war were just powerful people making the act of sending people out to kill and be killed seem legitimate.
Yes, the "special operations" and "coalitions of the willing" stuff is bullshit. But so were declarations of war. It's better you think about whether a military action is actually needed rather than believing a war is proper simply because the people in power did the paperwork correctly.
Declarations of war are bad, but they were made hard to do in modern states. Almost every single countries have rules and procedures in place to make sure a hot head can't do it over the weekend.
"Special Military Operations" undid all those efforts by putting all the powers back in the hands of a single person.
Classic war just doesn't have any appeal these days