Blood of Tyrants: George Washington & the Forging of the Presidency by Logan Beirne is a fascinating investigation on the original meaning of the commander in chief clause in the U.S. Constitution, and its direct applicability to contemporary debates. Such debates include the ways that successive presidents have exercised their power as commander in chief. Beirne looks to the nation’s first commander in chief, George Washington, for insight into how best to assess these debates. Blood of Tyrants centers around General Washington’s crucial role during the American Revolutionary War and how his wartime precedents influenced the meaning of the commander in chief clause. Beirne believes that this early history is of great importance on how the president, the Congress, and the Supreme Court interpret the powers of the …show more content…
By drawing from reams of primary source documents, this book brings to light facts that have been largely overlook. It relies heavily on primary sources from both American and British sides in order to provide rich eyewitness accounts. Delving into some of these previously lost documents, this book injects incendiary new facts into the present discussion and is intended as fodder for debate. Well documented. Blood of Tyrants is academically sound. We have fierce debates today concerning war tactics, drone strikes on Americans, torture, military tribunals, citizens’ rights during wartime, and how to reconcile the needs of the national defense with liberty and self-rule. Does the president have a constitutional power to torture foreign enemy combatants? Overrule Congress on war tactics? Deny formal trials to enemies? At least consider our first commander in chief’s principles when searching for an answer . Constrains and empowers contemporary occupants of the oval office.
Homeland security legal and ethical issues refer to the complex and nuanced challenges that arise when balancing the need to protect national security with the protection of individual rights and freedoms. These issues can include questions related to surveillance, privacy, civil liberties, and the use of military force, among others. They also include the ethical considerations that must be considered when making decisions about national security policies, such as the use of drones and targeted killings, the treatment of prisoners and detainees, and the handling of classified information. Addressing these legal and ethical issues requires a deep understanding of the law and the ability to navigate complex ethical dilemmas, as well as a commitment
David McCullough, in his Quill award winning book 1776, takes readers on a 294-page journey, which provides a vivid description of how Virginian born General George Washington became the first commander-in-chief of the Continental Army, and led them to victory against the British Red Coat Army commanded by General Howe, in the year of the American’s Declaration of Independence. McCullough, a Pulitzer award winning writer, diverts from his renowned biography writing of major historical figures such as John Adams, Theodore Roosevelt, and Harry Truman, to focus on the war and politics that shaped the most important year in America’s long and storied history in his book 1776. The book 1776 is said to be a companion piece to its predecessor John
Taking a chance with his prevalence and reputation Washington attempted to influence the American individuals to acknowledge a peace treaty that had been consulted with the British. As the general population storm swelled, riots appeared in New York, Boston, etc. Some needed Washington demoted; others demanded for his execution. Composing with solid and interesting detail, Beschloss indicates how Lincoln went up against the choice to issue the Liberation Decree or better known as the Emancipation Proclamation, and combat once more from the edge of political
It discusses in depth his contributions to the Revolutionary War with George Washington, his actions in the Continental Congress, and his work to establish further support for the Constitution. The author uses a variety of integrated evidence throughout the article, however proper citations are not provided. He references multiple
In his previous argument his use of sources made the claims strong and persuasive, but with this argument a lack of sources to back his claims makes the argument frail and impotent. An addition factor which makes his claim weak is the bias inherited as an American writer selling to American consumers. Not only is Atkinson more likely to side with the Allied forces due to nationalism, but he is also selling his book to Americans who likely share a similar nationalist bias with Atkinson and would thus be more inclined to read a pro-American account of
Question 1 Throughout Washington’s presidency, he set many precedents including in his farewell address. As the first president he had nothing to go off of and set precedents for future successors which many didn’t follow well enough. He set precedents such as not to have political parties, the title of Mr. President, advice to remain neutral with foreign nations, a two-term presidency, use of force to maintain order, and having a Cabinet for advice. The precedents he set were split into the two categories of the ones followed by the nation to this day and the ones which were forgotten and regretted. To begin with the one of the first two precedents on my list, he gave the advice to not have political parties.
The anarchy that manifested from the imbalanced of power and liberty by the Articles of Confederation and the dysfunctional nature of the military caused mistrust between Americans and their Continental army. As a new country, the mistrust shed the light on how America, in the midst of a revolution, needed an adamant central government in the event that there is another war or national
Ramsay discusses the events and ideas of the American Revolution (from the outbreak of turbulence in the 1760s to the onset of Washington’s administration) and makes an ardent Federalist defense of the Constitution of 1787. Based on the original and authorized 1789 version, this is the first new modern edition of the work.
When faced with difficult situations, Presidents throughout history have made questionable decisions over what is best for the American people. Whether faced with foreign or internal threats, the pressures of the executive office can lead to controversial choices. Actions that are initially viewed as necessary and justifiable, even applauded for their purpose, can become — in hindsight — unfair, unwise, and even unconstitutional. Often times, these lapses in proper judgement of what is lawful and necessary arise from trying times of high emotion, when the President believes that they are operating for the safety and preservation of the American people at the time of the conflict. Two such Presidents, elected during times of intense adversity
On August 2nd, 1964, three North Vietnamese Navy Cruisers were “unprovoked”, and fired on the USS Maddox while it was on a “standard patrol” in the Bay of Tonkin.[1] President Lyndon B Johnson proclaimed this event in a speech that provoked the first attack, ordered by him before war was declared on Vietnam. However, that event was most likely a fake created to increase action in North Vietnam.[2] Does the United States Constitution protect the United States from tyranny of the president over the people’s peace like that? The United States Constitution was written to give strength to the failed Articles of Confederation, and to protect the citizens from tyranny. Sadly, it was written in the 1700s. Tyranny is defined when one group or individual
Washington 's Farewell Address was one of the most significant statements of American political values of the time period, that gives advice and information on the necessity and importance of the unification of the nation, the Constitution and rule of law’s value, and the problems that existed in the political parties. In his Farewell Address, George Washington revealed some of the tribulations and conflicts undermining the republic’s stability and success. Washington 's main voice of concern was for the well-being of the eight-year-old Constitution, and it’s need for perseverance. He believed that the strength of the Republic was being threatened by outside forces of geographical sectionalism, political factionalism, and meddling from the
The constitution of the United States is justifiably built just as much for war as it is for peace. This can be seen during 1861, the midst of the Civil War, when Abraham Lincoln was faced with national security challenges that no American president had been confronted with before. Lincoln was put in a position that required him to walk a fine line between civil liberties and national securities. Some argue that Lincoln is one of the top presidents this nation has seen, yet others argue that the action to suspend habeas corpus eradicated him from that pedestal. Since the peak of the Civil War, historians have dissected and debated president Lincoln’s decision.
In the winter of 1776, during American Revolution, the still young America faced three major dilemmas: their seemingly imminent defeat, the moral debate between the Whigs and the British loyalists, and the panic and confusion of the American public. In efforts to settle the three American dilemmas, Thomas Paine wrote The Crisis No. 1 in December of 1776. In his work, Paine aimed to calm the American public and convince them to stand up to the British, and turn the war into an American victory. Paine was very successful in this, and his paper was proclaimed as one of the most persuasive works of the American Revolution. Paine’s
president or other members of the government to have to rely on popular oratory. They did not believe the president should constantly be on trial by the court of public opinion for everything he said. They wanted to “establish institutions which could operate effectively without the immediate support of the transient opinion” (242). The modern presidency is entirely different than what the founding fathers intended it to be.
His allusion to the constitution may be subtle, but it is important in understanding the change in regimes and how the reign of Great Britain and the freedom of the United States