@MadMikeIsenberg
Account based inUnited States
About this account
- Account based in
- United States
- Connected via
- United States Android App
Account-level information from X, not a live location or the device used for a specific post.
Peculiar & pedantic Zionist Omar Khayyam fanboy, author of historical novels & Quarter Millennial Minutes. زن زندگی آزادی עַם יִשְׂרָאֵל חַי 🇺🇸🇮🇱🍸🥩🥓
#MA02
Joined January 2022
- Tweets21.6K
- Following2.5K
- Followers2.8K
- Likes29.1K
Pinned Tweet
"Shogun for Persia"
Please check out my latest novel, The Thread of Reason. It's a murder mystery set in Baghdad & western Persia in the year 1092, featuring Omar Khayyam. The murder happened in real life. The investigation & solution are my invention.
amazon.com/dp/0985329750
Michael Isenberg retweeted
Ask Truman, Eisenhower, JFK, LBJ, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, Bush II, and Obama. Every last one of them deployed troops to combat without a declaration of war.
Both parties set the precedent.
Michael Isenberg retweeted
Because Congress likes it that way. By not passing legislation to stymie the action's of a given POTUS, they consent.
The answer no one wants to hear is that Ed agreed with the sentiment in principle but was too shrewd to let it show. It wasn't just one act. It was all the acts plus the crew, all supporting an antisemite. What are the chances he had no idea who and what they all were?
Michael Isenberg retweeted
Oh I'd say it all started in 1803 when President Jefferson directed the US Navy to take, sink, burn or destroy the ships of the Barbary Pirates. Notice there never was a "Barbary States War" in the early 1800s?
Michael Isenberg retweeted
There is inherent tension between Congress war declaration & the President’s Commander in Chief role. The President can intervene. Congress can stop any intervention, even small ones by refusing to fund it.
Congress doesn’t want to stop this war. They’ve never tried to defund.
Michael Isenberg retweeted
We'd have to go back decades, because that's how long this has been going on.
Michael Isenberg retweeted
Blame decades of legislators delegating legislative authority to past presidents.
Michael Isenberg retweeted
Simple: the NDAA.
By funding a “standing Army”, which is specifically prohibited by the Constitution, Congress lost its ability to curtail Presidential wielding of military resources.
EVERY problem in this nation boils down to not following the Constitution.
Michael Isenberg retweeted
Because no one in Congress wants to commit political suicide, the US has not declared war since WWII. They have no problem with war per se. They just don’t want to appear to be responsible for or against it.
Michael Isenberg retweeted
The last time Congress declared war was in 1941. How many wars have we been in since?
Michael Isenberg retweeted
The concept of "war" as envisioned in the Constitution became obsolete in August of 1945 with the advent of nuclear weapons. For the most part, we now just have "brushfire wars" and "police actions" as "asymmetrical conflicts" involving major power "proxies" (Ukraine vs. Russia being a dangerous exception.) US presidents need flexibility to react to these situations quickly .
Michael Isenberg retweeted
I encourage using words like “whence” and “forthwith” in everyday life, not to sound pretentious but because language is fun and it adds a touch of surrealism and whimsy to the other person’s day. How dull life would be if everyone felt pressured to speak in the same basic way.
Michael Isenberg retweeted
And yet people continue to not hold leaders accountable when they step beyond the bounds of the constitution! Every president since Truman has abused this power!
How did we get from "The Congress shall have Power...To declare War" to the President can start any war he wants, and Congress can stop him after the fact, but only if they have a veto-proof majority in both houses?
Now reading @NateSilver538's On the Edge.
"In a world wired for chaos, these players are rewriting the rules. High-stakes, high-IQ, and often high on their own mythologies, they are driving the next era of finance, tech, and politics. But what happens when their bets go too far?"
Just started, but I'm finding it fascinating so far. As someone who was trained in the sciences, I'm familiar with notions like Bayesian priors, expected values, and Nash equilibria. But the emergence of an ascendant subculture which combines these concepts with extreme but calculated risk taking is new to me. Given that I am, in many ways, stuck in the 1980s and '90s, the book is definitely helping me better understand the times in which we live now.
amazon.com/Edge-Art-Risking-…