Posted on 02/11/2015 6:20:04 AM PST by eastforker
Obama would limit authorization to three years, with no restriction where U.S. forces could pursue the threat.
But it isn’t Islamic and it isn’t a state......did I misremember it?
Except Iran as he wants them to have nuclear weapons.
Wait, whut?
Against?
Is that a typo?
I want to know what it means first.
Maybe a grown up got him cornered and talked some sense into him.
What? No, no, no, no. They're "vicious, violent zealots randomly shooting folks."
Or, more simply, VVZRSF.
World War III.
This is just to say “Democrats are serious about terrorism”, when they’re not. Whatever Congress authorizes, Obama still has to enforce. And he won’t.
Every move that Obama has made has been counterproductive.
Valjar - “Boy, you gotta at least ACT like you oppose the Islamic takeover of the world!”
Full text of President Barack Obama’s letter to lawmakers accompanying draft war powers resolution:
To the Congress of the United States:
The so-called Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) poses a threat to the people and stability of Iraq, Syria, and the broader Middle East, and to U.S. national security. It threatens American personnel and facilities located in the region and is responsible for the deaths of U.S. citizens James Foley, Steven Sotloff, Abdul-Rahman Peter Kassig, and Kayla Mueller. If left unchecked, ISIL will pose a threat beyond the Middle East, including to the United States homeland.
I have directed a comprehensive and sustained strategy to degrade and defeat ISIL. As part of this strategy, U.S. military forces are conducting a systematic campaign of airstrikes against ISIL in Iraq and Syria. Although existing statutes provide me with the authority I need to take these actions, I have repeatedly expressed my commitment to working with the Congress to pass a bipartisan authorization for the use of military force (AUMF) against ISIL. Consistent with this commitment, I am submitting a draft AUMF that would authorize the continued use of military force to degrade and defeat ISIL.
My Administration’s draft AUMF would not authorize long-term, large-scale ground combat operations like those our Nation conducted in Iraq and Afghanistan. Local forces, rather than U.S. military forces, should be deployed to conduct such operations. The authorization I propose would provide the flexibility to conduct ground combat operations in other, more limited circumstances, such as rescue operations involving U.S. or coalition personnel or the use of special operations forces to take military action against ISIL leadership. It would also authorize the use of U.S. forces in situations where ground combat operations are not expected or intended, such as intelligence collection and sharing, missions to enable kinetic strikes, or the provision of operational planning and other forms of advice and assistance to partner forces.
Although my proposed AUMF does not address the 2001 AUMF, I remain committed to working with the Congress and the American people to refine, and ultimately repeal, the 2001 AUMF. Enacting an AUMF that is specific to the threat posed by ISIL could serve as a model for how we can work together to tailor the authorities granted by the 2001 AUMF.
I can think of no better way for the Congress to join me in supporting our Nation’s security than by enacting this legislation, which would show the world we are united in our resolve to counter the threat posed by ISIL.
Who will the Left trot out, ala Cindy Shehan, to sit shiva for America and protest while 0bama wages WAR?!?!
I mean, this guy won the NOBEL PEACE PRIZE, fer Pete’s Sake! Does he have to give it back now?
LOL! I crack myself UP!
Congress should draft the resolution so that it includes the words “Radical Islam” and/or “Islamic Terrorists.” Then we’ll see if Obama accepts or rejects the resolution.
Will Obama be supporting the Islamists or opposing them?
That would be SO BAD if Obama and his globalist buddies and the hierarchy of Saudi Arabia get to define "Islamic State militants". Any approval should be directed to fighting the terrorists of BocaHaran and ISIS.
It will just me more weapons, training and money for the crazies.
Ditto.
Jordanian leadership possibly had a few words.
The time limit is what bothers me most about this. This indicates to the enemy that we are not really serious. Do the terrorists pledge Jihad, but if they don’t get what they want in three years, they’ll just quit and go home? Of course not! They are serious about their cause. When we got into WWII, did we pledge to defeat Japan and Germany, but if we didn’t finish the job in three years, we’d quit fighting and go home?
You cannot fight a war on a timeline and expect to win. This just indicates that this is another example where we’ll be putting our troops in harm’s way in a conflct where we are not going all out to win. I cannot support that.
“I don’t believe an authorization of any kind is wise while we have a JV president.”
That has GOT to be the post of the day.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.