Did Obama just lay out the rules of engagement for US military vs Civilans

This executive order signed July 1 2016 was listed today on the Whitehouse Website

http://w

It is titled Executive order on pre and post strike measures to address civilian casualties in US operations involving the use of force,it to me looks to be rules of engagement for the military vs citizens.I am not an American but is that even constitutional,why would you need detail such an order?

a reply to: khnum

Since the Posse Comitatus act prohibits the use of federal military against US citizens I would say no. It would seem to address concerns about civilians affected by military actions overseas.

Now, if the Posse Comitatus act were to be repealed, that would be a different matter. But the President does not have the power to do that.

a reply to: khnum

Same reason as Rex 84 & NDAA'11. They're getting their pieces in order for the next scene.
Everybody has seen it coming for a long time, and we have a pretty good idea about some of the things it will involve;
But like the return of Jesus, no one knows the hour of it's arrival.

a reply to: Phage

True but it does discuss operations outside areas of active hostility basically thats the whole planet US included.

a reply to: khnum

As a Nation, we are steadfastly committed to complying with our obligations under the law of armed conflict, including those that address the protection of civilians, such as the fundamental principles of necessity, humanity, distinction, and proportionality.

The protection of civilians is fundamentally consistent with the effective, efficient, and decisive use of force in pursuit of U.S. national interests. Minimizing civilian casualties can further mission objectives; help maintain the support of partner governments and vulnerable populations, especially in the conduct of counterterrorism and counterinsurgency operations; and enhance the legitimacy and sustainability of U.S. operations critical to our national security. As a matter of policy, the United States therefore routinely imposes certain heightened policy standards that are more protective than the requirements of the law of armed conflict that relate to the protection of civilians.

Sounds like genocide to me.

Derp.

a reply to: khnum

True but it does discuss operations outside areas of active hostility basically thats the whole planet US included. True but it does discuss operations outside areas of active hostility basically thats the whole planet US included.

Except that the law excludes the US. The law trumps an executive order.

a reply to: Phage

The Posse Comitatus Act is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385, original at 20 Stat. 152) signed on June 18, 1878 by President Rutherford B. Hayes.

Bonus Army - July 28, 1932

We probably don't hear a lot about it due to the direct involvement of national 'heroes' like MacArthur and Patton.

At 4:45 p.m., commanded by Gen. Douglas MacArthur, the 12th Infantry Regiment, Fort Howard, Maryland, and the 3rd Cavalry Regiment, supported by six battle tanks commanded by Maj. George S. Patton, formed in Pennsylvania Avenue while thousands of civil service employees left work to line the street and watch. The Bonus Marchers, believing the troops were marching in their honor, cheered the troops until Patton ordered[citation needed] the cavalry to charge them—an action which prompted the spectators to yell, "Shame! Shame!"

Bottom Line: There's law ... and then there's the thing that's gonna happen.

a reply to: Phage

Since when did his "Constitutional power" to do such things slow him down any?

He's installed Czar after Czar unConstitutionally.

He's signed edict after edict and seemingly made far too many of them stick.

I'm not impressed with the notion that the Posse Comitatus has much life left in it, at this point. And if the gritchy one gets in, it will have even less. Which, of course is the goal of their ruthless bosses.

And, IIRC, some of the terror and Homeland Security Dept legislation essentially guts the Posse Comitatus law anyway.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: khnum

True but it does discuss operations outside areas of active hostility basically thats the whole planet US included. True but it does discuss operations outside areas of active hostility basically thats the whole planet US included.

Except that the law excludes the US. The law trumps an executive order.

wut about martial law

a reply to: BO XIAN

And, IIRC, some of the terror and Homeland Security Dept legislation essentially guts the Posse Comitatus law anyway.

Yes. Under the Bush admin it took a big hit. But that section of law was repealed.
You really should try to keep up with things that are this important.

a reply to: Phage

It also depends on what you mean by "power to do that."

If he gets sufficient

--intimidations in place
--military and/or police sufficiently loyal to his edicts and fantasies of power-mongering . . . all the more likely given his firing all the patriotic military leaders he can ferret out.

etc. etc.

He'll continue to do whatever he jolly well wants.

And the bw*tch who already sees herself as QUITE ABOVE THE LAW will NOT be slowed down a nanosecond by ANY laws THEN.

a reply to: Phage

That is as you say the current situation but it does not acknowledge that law and if that law were repealed the way its worded provides no particular protection,does martial law negate posse commiitatus or a state state of emergency i.e does it have to be only the national guard in such situations or can the feds invoke military dhs and overrule etc?

a reply to: Phage

My understanding was that the current Destroyer in Chief succeeded in getting worse legislation passed.

I was certainly unhappy but not surprised at Bush's submitting so compliantly with the commands of his bosses.

But then, he probably chose to stay alive.

a reply to: khnum
The EO you cite protects civilians in places where the US military conducts operations.

Or did you miss that part?

a reply to: Phage

I don't know how long your adoration of the details and letter of the law will hold true in a rapidly changing dramatic, violent situation . . . particularly dynamics and situations staged and concocted deliberately to afford greater tyrannical control and trashing of the posse comitatus law.

a reply to: Phage

Minimising casualties is not protection a 500lb jdam makes a pretty damn big mess

But on the bright side, Obama is just a human, and some day his body will die, same with Hillary and the Bushes. And for those who believe in a Creator. They will all stand before him and be judged, and sentenced for their behavior and works

a reply to: BO XIAN
My. What an impressive number of buzzwords.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: khnum

Since the Posse Comitatus act prohibits the use of federal military against US citizens I would say no. It would seem to address concerns about civilians affected by military actions overseas.

Now, if the Posse Comitatus act were to be repealed, that would be a different matter. But the President does not have the power to do that.

Well that's an easy fix; arm civilian police with federal military grade equipment.

a reply to: Aristotelian1

Well that's an easy fix; arm civilian police with federal military grade equipment.

In which case the premise of the OP makes no more sense than it does now.