Does the President’s Discretionary Mass Murder Power Need Oversight?

Individual citizens aren’t free to orchestrate conflicts that cause mass death; a President is. The sole Presidential requirement is to contrive plausible reasons and narratives that will play well in the media for mass murder of war. Foreign citizen-soldiers drafted to fight in wars enabled by military support and encouragement from the U.S. President that become combat casualties are murder victims too, as of course are civilian casualties.

The Ukraine war is largely a product of President Biden’s pressure to keep Russian land from Russia that was lost to communism and the illegal, non-Democratic Clinton-Yeltsin land redistribution perpetrated during the aenomic breakup of the former Soviet Union. Western war promoters in built up weapons, cash transfers, pretexts and narratives for support before for more than a decade before engaging military conflict.

Opportunities for a peaceful resolution have abounded the past 30 years by revisiting the illegal land redistribution and having the citizens of the former Soviet Union vote on it themselves. Adjustments have been made regarding land allocations given to Alaska natives since the ANILCA settlements of the Nixon administration with federal and swaps. Substantial land in Holkam Bay was given to the Tlingit Tribe fairly recently through Senator Lisa Murkowski’s efforts in the Senate. Russia deserves at least that much consideration.

Elevated from citizen to President of the United States a citizen is free to liberally arrange the deaths of foreigners if they choose to as they often have the past half century. As defender of the nation people believe the President is obligated to de frappe foreign threats such as terrorism and top terminate foreign military attacks upon the United States. When a President decides to support conflict with military assistance in foreign ventures as policy actions; especially when not obligated in some kind of treaty, the President is not ethically covered by the self-defense aspect of exoneration for a commander-in-chief fulfilling the obligations of office. The President has entered the realm of being a mass murderer or at the very minimum an accessory to mass murder.

It is somewhat interesting that ordinary citizens elected to the power of the Presidential office find it so easy to configure the deaths of tens and hundreds of thousands of people in foreign military conflicts with and without direct U.S. military action. Sending HIMARS, cluster bombs, drones, smart bombs and sundry other lethal equipment to the Ukraine military along with intelligence and operations planning etc plainly resulted in tens of thousands of Russian deaths and indirectly, by protracting the conflict far beyond its natural expiration, Ukrainian deaths. President Biden has found it very natural to act in the realm of mass murderer; as easy as breathing, and nothing has been written about that so far. Those that study ethics issues for public affairs sometimes hired by the government and corporations to approve controversial procedures have remained silent thus far (to my awareness).

If propping up the Ukrainian war is not in self defense (the President won’t even secure the southern border of the U.S. against illegal entry of potential terrorists) or an act made in a treaty obligation such as George Washington warned about, but is made in disregard of Russia’s legitimate historical claim to Crimea and Eastern Ukraine and to actualize a vision of a reduced Russia with Western hegemony that could flank China and make the world a playground for Wall Street can that exonerate the President from using mass murder to accomplish his goal that might instead have been accomplished through peaceful evolution and mutual economic cooperation?

Does the United States need to legislate controls on a President’s opportunity to act as a mass murderer after ascending to office? Should there be some sort of measure of the number of deaths a President can bring about through direct and indirect means without a declaration of war? Does the United States have any moral capacity or interest in evaluating the ethics of a President perpetrating death upon foreigners outside of wars of self-defense of the United States and cap the number permitted to be killed by Presidential discretionary, willful mass-murder?