This event scores high on both dimensions (A=55.3, B=32.1, D=+23.2). Constitutional damage is severe: declaring entities 'unlawful combatants' and ordering military strikes represents extraordinary executive power assertion (separation=4.8×0.16=0.768), bypasses congressional war powers and international law frameworks (rule_of_law=4.5×0.18=0.81), and directly authorizes lethal force (violence=4.2×0.06=0.252). The mechanism is concrete policy change with international scope, earning 1.3×1.2 modifiers. Severity multipliers reflect dangerous precedent (1.25) for unilateral military action against non-state actors, moderate durability (1.15) as orders can be rescinded but actions taken are irreversible, and difficult reversibility (1.1) of established precedent. However, the immediate White House downplay/walkback creates significant distraction dynamics (B=32.1). Layer 1: extremely media-friendly dramatic declaration (9.0), high outrage potential across political spectrum (8.5), novel framing (7.5). Layer 2: massive mismatch between declaration and walkback (8.5) creates confusion rather than clarity, strong narrative pivot potential (7.0). Intentionality indicators (11/15) include the declare-then-downplay pattern, ambiguous scope, and confusion generation. While distraction is substantial, the underlying constitutional damage from the actual order (even if later downplayed) is severe enough that D=+23.2 exceeds Mixed threshold. Classification: Mixed due to both A≥25 and B≥25 with |D|<10... wait, D=23.2>10, but the walkback/confusion element suggests this straddles the boundary. The real constitutional impact depends on whether strikes actually occur, but the declaration itself sets precedent.