NYT: Obama's ISIS war-authorization request to Congress "alarmingly broad... excessively expansive"

[bigtree]

Letta Tayler ?@lettatayler 3h3 hours ago
#Obama's #ISIS war-authorization request to Congress "alarmingly broad... excessively expansive": @nytimes. Indeed. http://nyti.ms


The Opinion Pages | Editorial
Obama Seeks an Expansive War Authorization to Combat ISIS

____The parameters of a proposed war authorization the White House sent to Congress on Wednesday are alarmingly broad. It does not limit the battlefield to Syria and Iraq, the strongholds of the Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL, which is attempting to form a caliphate. It also seeks permission to attack “associated persons or forces” of the brutal group, a term that appears to be excessively expansive and could undermine Mr. Obama’s stated intent to limit the force authorization.

While a new Authorization for Use of Military Force, or A.U.M.F., would sunset the 2002 law Congress passed to pave the way for the invasion of Iraq, it would leave intact the 2001 mandate for the war in Afghanistan. That is problematic, considering that the Obama administration has relied on that law to start attacks that were well beyond the scope of what lawmakers authorized at the time. In a letter to Congress delivered on Wednesday, Mr. Obama reiterated his intent to “refine, and ultimately repeal” that statute, which serves as a foundation for American military operations in Afghanistan. He should go further and set a date for its expiration.

If the White House prevails, it would get virtually unrestricted power to engage in attacks around the globe as long as it can justify a connection, however tenuous, to the Islamic State.

.... as Congress tailors a new war authorization, lawmakers should reflect on the missteps and unintended consequences of efforts over the past decade to fight Sunni insurgent groups in the Middle East and Africa. While American bombs and firepower have undoubtedly killed many terrorists, some of the tactics the government has used have expanded the ranks of militant groups. A mandate for war that was intended to punish the terrorists behind the 9/11 attacks was bloated to the point where it could be used to justify anti-terrorist campaigns just about anywhere.


read full editorial: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/12/opinion/obama-seeking-an-expansive-war-authorization-congress.html?smid=tw-share&_r=0

related:

full text of the resolution proposed by President Obama: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/02/11/obamas-request-for-congressional-authorization-to-fight-the-islamic-state-full-text/

Full text of President Obama’s letter to lawmakers accompanying draft war powers resolution: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/obama-sends-congress-draft-war-authorization-article-1.2110734

Lawfare: Obama's draft ISIL AUMF actually expands presidential war-making power from the current baseline
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026215518

my post, 'There no such thing as limited strikes, limited war. We’re going to find out the hard way": :http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026211061

[JoePhilly]

1. It will be fun to watch this divide the GOP.

They hate him too much to agree to this.

But they can't call him too weak now either.

[ann---]

2. This is even

worse than Bush. OMG! Who would have thought this about Obama. So disgusted.

[bigtree]

3. »

[whatchamacallit]

4. A universe of possibilities for shaping our reality and this all we seem to imagine...

I'm heartsick and disgusted by our depravity.

[bigtree]

5. exactly, whatchamacallit

...almost no effort to develop responses to ISIS which don't involve gathering up our own sticks and stones like frightened cavemen.

[whatchamacallit]

6. Yup... sigh

It's nice to know there are folks like you who see beyond the conditioned madness, bigtree.