War On Terror: The president's request for authorization to combat the Islamic State anywhere, but with strict ground-force limitations, is a political trap. Congress can't chain itself to half-hearted war efforts.
'The president does not need a new authorization in order to continue to take action" against IS, the White House accurately asserted last September, citing the historical fact that an al-Qaida chapter was, in fact, the progenitor of IS.
| CLICK HERE to Read the 2002 congressional authorization for the Iraq War |
As stated in the 2002 congressional authorization for the Iraq War, which is still in effect, the U.S. and its allies can continue "to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001."
Al-Qaida, of course, was the main entity behind 9/11.
So why did the president on Wednesday call on Congress to "join me in supporting our nation's security" with a specific authorization of force to "show the world we are united in our resolve to counter the threat posed by ISIL"?
Because he wants Congress' seal of approval on what might best be called a "semi-war."
The objective is not total victory, but to "degrade and ultimately defeat" the enemy over an undefined number of years. In such a context, dubbed "strategic patience" by National Security Adviser Susan Rice, losing the war year after year, extending into the next presidency, is acceptable.
The request submitted to Congress prohibits "enduring offensive combat operations" — a weasel-worded way of saying no U.S. ground troops.Read the rest of the story HERE.
If you like what you see, please "Like" us on Facebook either here or here. Please follow us on Twitter here.
1 comment:
Obama is the worst foreign policy president in history. He talks about random attacks and not to worry about IS, and then asks for a use of force resolution against them. No way any congressman should vote for this. Obama just can't be trusted. He could twist it around to mean something entirely different.
Post a Comment