Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: ITS WAR! Obama will send Congress request for war powers against Islamic State. TWT

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,161

    ITS WAR! Obama will send Congress request for war powers against Islamic State. TWT

    “What the president’s interested in is not just passing this AUMF but being able to demonstrate some bipartisan support for it,” White House press secretary Josh Earnest said Thursday. “The goal here is to demonstrate clearly to the American people, to our allies and to our enemies that there is strong support for this commitment to degrade and ultimately destroy [the Islamic State].”

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...ic-state-expe/

    https://news.google.com/news/rtc?ncl...sv_pYxpawVqAHM

    http://www.defensenews.com/story/def...ntel/22474793/

    To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against the terrorist organization Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (“ISIL”).

    Whereas for months Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (“ISIL”) has been engaged in a campaign of murder and mayhem across a broad swath of Iraq and Syria that has killed thousands of innocent people and terrorized millions;

    Whereas ISIL has brought under its control large areas of Iraq and Syria and announced on June 29, 2014, the establishment of a new caliphate;

    Whereas in its conduct of military operations, its treatment of personnel captured on the battlefield, and its behavior towards civilians in areas under its control, ISIL has shown a level of brutality and depravity that shocks the conscience;

    Whereas ISIL has brutally murdered American, British, and Japanese hostages and continues to hold and threated the lives of other western hostages;

    Whereas the threat posed by the recruitment of ISIL fighters in the United States and Europe and the prospect of these fighters returning to the United States or allied countries jeopardizes the security of the United States and its allies;

    Whereas ISIL poses an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States and if left unchecked will be the locus of plots to attack our homeland;

    Whereas the rise of ISIL, the continuing threat posed by al Qaeda, and the redeployment of United States combat troops from Afghanistan highlight the need to re-examine and harmonize the legal authorities under which the President is authorized to take offensive military action; and

    Whereas the President has authority under the Constitution to take action to protect the United States and its citizens from imminent threat or attack but Congress alone holds the power to declare war: Now, therefore, be it

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

    SECTION 1.SHORT TITLE.

    This joint resolution may be cited as the “Authorization for Use of Military Force Against ISIL Resolution”.

    SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

    (a) In General.—The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (“ISIL”).

    (b) Geographical Limitation.—The authority granted in subsection (a) shall be confined to the territory of the Republic of Iraq and the Syrian Arab Republic. The limitation of this subsection shall not apply to the Armed Forces of the United States engaged in training of indigenous Syrian or regional military forces for the purpose of combating ISIL

    (c) No Authorization For Use Of Ground Forces In Combat.—The authority granted in subsection (a) does not include the authority for the deployment of ground forces in a combat role. For purposes of this subsection, “ground forces in a combat role” does not include special operations forces or other forces that may be deployed in a training, advisory, or intelligence capacity.

    (d) Termination.—The authority granted in subsection (a) shall terminate on the date that is three years after the date of the enactment of this joint resolution.

    (e) War Powers Resolution Requirements.—

    (1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION.—Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution.

    (2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS.—Nothing in this joint resolution supersedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution.

    SEC. 3. REPEAL OF PRIOR AUTHORIZATIONS FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

    (a) Repeal.—The following provisions of law are hereby repealed:

    (1) The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107–243; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note).

    (2) The Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107–40; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note).

    (b) Effective Date.—The repeal made by subsection (a)(2) shall be effective as of the date that is three years after the date of the enactment of this joint resolution.

    SEC. 4. REPORTS TO CONGRESS.

    (a) In General.—The President shall, at least once every 60 days after the date of the enactment of this joint resolution, submit to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate a report on matters relevant to this joint resolution, including actions taken pursuant to the exercise of authority granted in section 2 and the status of planning for efforts that are expected to be required over the next 60 days.

    (b) Consolidation.—To the extent that the submission of any report required in subsection (a) coincides with the submissions of any other report on matters relevant to this joint resolution otherwise required to be submitted to Congress pursuant to the reporting requirements of the War Powers Resolution, all such reports may be submitted as a single consolidated report to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate.

    http://www.lawfareblog.com/2015/01/r...-updated-aumf/
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  2. #2
    Regular Member 77zach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Marion County, FL
    Posts
    3,005
    War is the health of the state.
    “If the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free, how is it that the tendencies of these organizers are always good? Do not the legislators and their appointed agents also belong to the human race? Or do they believe that they themselves are made of a finer clay than the rest of mankind? ” -Bastiat

    I don't "need" to openly carry a handgun or own an "assault weapon" any more than Rosa Parks needed a seat on the bus.

  3. #3
    Regular Member F350's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The High Plains of Wyoming
    Posts
    1,030
    yea; BUT is he actually going to DO anything other than make perdy words????

  4. #4
    Regular Member SovereigntyOrDeath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Coeur D Alene, Idaho
    Posts
    430
    Quote Originally Posted by F350 View Post
    yea; BUT is he actually going to DO anything other than make perdy words????
    Exactly!

    The lame duck is just quacking.

    Who is next? here are 40 more terrorist organizations: http://www.nctc.gov/site/groups/index.html

    Is the knucklehead going to declare war on each one?

    I can hear it now...."We didn't attack this area or that area because there are members of other terrorist organizations we have no authority to kill.".....yata, yata, yata....
    "Nullification is the rightful remedy" Thomas Jefferson
    http://tracking.tenthamendmentcenter...-preservation/

    "Constitutional Carry is not an oxymoron"
    A Sovereign

    "Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem." Thomas Jefferson

  5. #5
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,279
    Of course then the case will be made we must elect Hillary to carry on this fight.
    It is well that war is so terrible – otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  6. #6
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Yea because the last decade of so worked out so well.......
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,161

    Understanding War in context Perspective on American involvement has soured since.

    [Penultimate paragraph] That the Johnson administration decided to take a firmer stance than its predecessors met with widespread approval by the American public. After bombs were dropped on a North Vietnam army camp in early February 1965, polls found a 70 percent approval rating for the action, with 80 percent supporting actual American boots-on-the-ground involvement in Vietnam. Adding to the public’s commitment was a riotous demonstration of 2,000 in Moscow that attacked the American Embassy. By year’s end, Time magazine named Gen. William Westmoreland, commander of American forces, as its “Man of the Year.”

    To be sure, public support of the Vietnam War declined as American casualties mounted, troop increases mushroomed as a result of a return to the military draft and battle victories were elusive. But the long endeavor from 1965 to 1973 illustrated that American commitment to defend the right of self-determination of nations against communist oppressors would be exercised, no matter the risks, sacrifices and tangible results — an emboldened legacy more than sufficient for dealing with future crises and threats, such as the rise of radical Islamic terrorists.

    • Thomas V. DiBacco is professor emeritus at American University.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...nam-war-in-co/
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •