Posted on 03/06/2023 9:48:31 PM PST by RandFan
U.S. Congressman Matt Gaetz (FL-01) introduced a War Powers Resolution to direct President Joe Biden to remove the United States Armed Forces from Syria. Since War Powers Resolutions are privileged, the House of Representatives will be forced to vote on Rep. Gaetz’s resolution within 18 days of its introduction.
Rep. Gaetz, a member of the House Armed Services Committee, filed the War Powers Resolution on Tuesday following a February 17th press release from U.S. Central Command, which announced four U.S. servicemembers were wounded during a partnered U.S. and Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) helicopter raid in northeastern Syria, ultimately killing a senior ISIS leader.
The U.S. Constitution gives Congress the sole power to declare war. To date, Congress has never authorized kinetic participation of U.S. Armed Forces in Syria. Additionally, pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution, Rep. Gaetz’s War Powers Resolution mandates the removal of U.S. Armed Forces from Syria no later than 15 days after the date of the resolution’s adoption.
Mounting concerns continue to signal that President Biden himself does not have a cognitive grasp on the Syrian conflict. During an August 2021 interview with ABC News on U.S. involvement in the Syria conflict, President Biden stated, “[w]e don't have military in Syria to make sure that we’re going to be protected.” At the time of the interview, the United States had an estimate of 900 troops in Syria.
“Congress has never authorized the use of military force in Syria. The United States is currently not in a war with or against Syria, so why are we conducting dangerous military operations there? President Biden must remove all U.S. Armed Forces from Syria. America First means actually putting the people of our country first — not the interests of the Military Industrial Complex,” said Congressman Gaetz.
CONTACT YOUR REP NOW!!!!!!!!!
This is something everyone can do to make a difference.
House switchboard operator: (202) 224-3121
No wonder the deep state tried to get rid of Matt.
Just like many Democrats before him, Geatz has no standing here. The Supreme Court and Constitution give the Executive Branch priority when it comes to Foreign and Military Policy.
Geatz is a lightweight. The Bill fails on its merits.
um... huh?
Apr 2, 1798, James Madison letter to Thomas Jefferson
Yes, war is vested in Congress. However, the Executive Branch has wide latitude in taking action that is not considered “full war”.
Each President, nearly every one has filed objections to the Constitutionality of the War Powers Resolution. But, most simply veto the Bill.
Democrat Kane attempted the War Powers after Trump killed Iranian General Soleimani with a drone strike. Kane had no standing on War Powers so, drafted a separate resolution, which failed.
Do you have a Supreme Court decision or perhaps constitutional reference to the term “full war”? Or do you just make things up convince yourself putting your army in another country and killing their people is something less than war.
The Executive Branch has never recognized the War Powers, so when they make “obligated” reports to Congress, they change the language so as not to recognize its authority. It has never gone to the Supreme Court, but President’s simply ignore it.
See Trump in putting ground forces in Syria, killing Iranian Gen., and firing cruise missiles into Syria.
There are a myriad of Constitutional questions regarding War Powers. This one references the “full war” concept.
“There is controversy over whether the War Powers Resolution’s constraints on the President’s authority as Commander-in-Chief are consistent with the Constitution.[48] Presidents have therefore drafted reports to Congress required of the President to state that they are “consistent with” the War Powers Resolution rather than “pursuant to” so as to take into account the presidential position that the resolution is unconstitutional.[49]
One argument for the unconstitutionality of the War Powers Resolution by Philip Bobbitt[50] argues “The power to make war is not an enumerated power” and the notion that to “declare” war is to “commence” war is a “contemporary textual preconception”. Bobbitt contends that the Framers of the Constitution believed that statutory authorization was the route by which the United States would be committed to war, and that ‘declaration’ was meant for only total wars, as shown by the history of the Quasi-War with France (1798–1800). In general, constitutional powers are not so much separated as “linked and sequenced”; Congress’s control over the armed forces is “structured” by appropriation, while the President commands”
If Gaetz wants to stop fighting ISIS (which is what we are doing), let him talk about that.
As someone else said, the vote will fail anyway. Gaetz is grandstanding, just like Republicans did when they voted to repeal Obamacare 15 times but when Trump won they couldn't do it.
I want us out of Syria, have for a long time. But I want us to remember that our alliance with the YPG/YPJ Kurds (later called the SDF) brought ISIS to an end. (except what Turkey planted in Efrin)
War should always be an absolute necessity, before we commit to that act.
DC has a long history of limitless corruption. That is the target we must fix our efforts on correcting.
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.