Send a Tweet
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 2 Share on Twitter 3 Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
OpEdNews Op Eds    H1'ed 2/13/15

Five Reasons Congress Should Reject Obama's ISIS War - IPS

By       (Page 1 of 3 pages)     (# of views)   10 comments

Reprinted from www.ips-dc.org

- Advertisement -

ORIGINALLY IN FOREIGN POLICY IN FOCUS.

(Photo: U.S. Army / Flickr)

- Advertisement -

At long last, the Obama administration has submitted a draft resolution to Congress that would authorize the ongoing U.S.-led military intervention against the Islamic State, or ISIS.

The effort comes more than six months after the U.S. began bombing targets in Iraq and Syria. Since then, some 3,000 U.S. troops have been ordered to Iraq, and coalition air forces have carried out over 2,000 bombing runs on both sides of the border.

- Advertisement -

Better late than never? Maybe not.

The language proposed by the White House would authorize the president to deploy the U.S. military against the Islamic State and "associated persons or forces" for a period of three years, at which point the authorization would have to be renewed.

In an attempt to reassure members of Congress wary of signing off on another full-scale war in the Middle East, the authorization would supposedly prohibit the use of American soldiers in "enduring offensive ground combat operations." It would also repeal the authorization that President George W. Bush used to invade Iraq back in 2002.

The New York Times describes the draft authorization as "a compromise to ease concerns of members in both noninterventionist and interventionist camps: those who believe the use of ground forces should be explicitly forbidden, and those who do not want to hamstring the commander in chief."

As an ardent supporter of "hamstringing the commander in chief" in this particular case, let me count the ways that my concerns have not been eased by this resolution.

1. Its vague wording will almost certainly be abused.

- Advertisement -

For one thing, the administration has couched its limitations on the use of ground forces in some curiously porous language.

How long is an "enduring" engagement, for example? A week? A year? The full three years of the authorization and beyond?

And what's an "offensive" operation if not one that involves invading another country? The resolution's introduction claims outright that U.S. strikes against ISIS are justified by America's "inherent right of individual and collective self-defense." If Obama considers the whole war "inherently defensive," does the proscription against "offensive" operations even apply?

And what counts as "combat"? In his last State of the Union address, Obama proclaimed that "our combat mission in Afghanistan is over." But only two months earlier, he'd quietly extended the mission of nearly 10,000 U.S. troops in the country for at least another year. So the word seems meaningless.

In short, the limitation on ground troops is no limitation at all. "What they have in mind," said California Democrat Adam Schiff, "is still fairly broad and subject to such wide interpretation that it could be used in almost any context."

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3

 

- Advertisement -

Must Read 4   Well Said 3   News 2  
Rate It | View Ratings

Peter Certo Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Peter Certo is the acting editor of Foreign Policy in Focus (fpif.org) and the associate editor of Right Web (rightweb.irc-online.org). Both publications are projects of the Institute for Policy Studies.
Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Writers Guidelines
Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

STAY IN THE KNOW
If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEdNews Newsletter
Name
Email
   (Opens new browser window)
 

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Five Reasons Congress Should Reject Obama's ISIS War - IPS

Sanctioning Iran to Influence Israel

Dogwhistling Past Libya

Barack Obama and the Pitfalls of Priestliness

Real Nowhere Men (and Women)

Obama's Biggest Compromise Yet?