SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
President Obama last month hosted members from Capitol Hill including (from left) House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, California Republican; House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, California Democrat; House Speaker John A. Boehner, Ohio Republican; and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Kentucky Republican. (Photo: Carolyn Kaster/AP)
President Obama has shown leadership by sending Congress his proposal for a new Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) on ISIL and by recommending a repeal of the 2002 Iraq AUMF. Now my Republican colleagues no longer have an excuse to prevent a debate on the ongoing half-year war in which the U.S. is currently involved.
The president's proposal acknowledges the reality that the current authorizations amount to open-ended, blank checks for endless war. Because of congressional inaction, these AUMFs have provided authority for presidents to take unchecked military action.
Congress must live up to its constitutional responsibility to debate and vote on matters of war and peace. For more than a decade, Congress has abdicated this role.
President Obama's proposal to repeal of the 2002 AUMF, which I have long fought for, is a positive sign, but we must address the root of the problem. Congress must repeal the 2001 AUMF, which allows any president to wage perpetual war, in any place and at any time.
Ultimately, Congress has the responsibility of crafting any new authorization. Unfortunately, the president's proposed AUMF is overly vague, and by failing to repeal or reform the 2001 authorization, it would leave a blank check for war in place.
Congress has to go back to the drawing board.
Any debate in Congress must include a comprehensive solution to ultimately degrade and dismantle ISIL. National security experts have been clear: There is no military solution to ISIL. We simply cannot neglect the political, diplomatic and economic strategies that are central to ending violent extremism.
In 2001, I was the only member of Congress to vote against the original AUMF. Days after the vote, I wrote an op-ed for the San Francisco Chronicle explaining, "Some believe this resolution was only symbolic, designed to show national resolve. But I could not ignore that it provided explicit authority, under the War Powers Resolution and the Constitution, to go to war."
In the ensuing decade, we have seen this authorization used over 30 times, including to legitimize warrantless surveillance, drone strikes around the globe, and unlawful detention in Guantanamo Bay.
It is abundantly clear that this resolution was not symbolic. It catapulted us into a global and endless war. Well over a decade later, we are still grappling with the consequences of our haste.
Let's not make the same mistake again. Congress needs to do its job by repealing the open-ended authorizations and seriously considering the costs and consequences of another open-ended war in the Middle East.
It's time to stop endless war.
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
President Obama has shown leadership by sending Congress his proposal for a new Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) on ISIL and by recommending a repeal of the 2002 Iraq AUMF. Now my Republican colleagues no longer have an excuse to prevent a debate on the ongoing half-year war in which the U.S. is currently involved.
The president's proposal acknowledges the reality that the current authorizations amount to open-ended, blank checks for endless war. Because of congressional inaction, these AUMFs have provided authority for presidents to take unchecked military action.
Congress must live up to its constitutional responsibility to debate and vote on matters of war and peace. For more than a decade, Congress has abdicated this role.
President Obama's proposal to repeal of the 2002 AUMF, which I have long fought for, is a positive sign, but we must address the root of the problem. Congress must repeal the 2001 AUMF, which allows any president to wage perpetual war, in any place and at any time.
Ultimately, Congress has the responsibility of crafting any new authorization. Unfortunately, the president's proposed AUMF is overly vague, and by failing to repeal or reform the 2001 authorization, it would leave a blank check for war in place.
Congress has to go back to the drawing board.
Any debate in Congress must include a comprehensive solution to ultimately degrade and dismantle ISIL. National security experts have been clear: There is no military solution to ISIL. We simply cannot neglect the political, diplomatic and economic strategies that are central to ending violent extremism.
In 2001, I was the only member of Congress to vote against the original AUMF. Days after the vote, I wrote an op-ed for the San Francisco Chronicle explaining, "Some believe this resolution was only symbolic, designed to show national resolve. But I could not ignore that it provided explicit authority, under the War Powers Resolution and the Constitution, to go to war."
In the ensuing decade, we have seen this authorization used over 30 times, including to legitimize warrantless surveillance, drone strikes around the globe, and unlawful detention in Guantanamo Bay.
It is abundantly clear that this resolution was not symbolic. It catapulted us into a global and endless war. Well over a decade later, we are still grappling with the consequences of our haste.
Let's not make the same mistake again. Congress needs to do its job by repealing the open-ended authorizations and seriously considering the costs and consequences of another open-ended war in the Middle East.
It's time to stop endless war.
President Obama has shown leadership by sending Congress his proposal for a new Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) on ISIL and by recommending a repeal of the 2002 Iraq AUMF. Now my Republican colleagues no longer have an excuse to prevent a debate on the ongoing half-year war in which the U.S. is currently involved.
The president's proposal acknowledges the reality that the current authorizations amount to open-ended, blank checks for endless war. Because of congressional inaction, these AUMFs have provided authority for presidents to take unchecked military action.
Congress must live up to its constitutional responsibility to debate and vote on matters of war and peace. For more than a decade, Congress has abdicated this role.
President Obama's proposal to repeal of the 2002 AUMF, which I have long fought for, is a positive sign, but we must address the root of the problem. Congress must repeal the 2001 AUMF, which allows any president to wage perpetual war, in any place and at any time.
Ultimately, Congress has the responsibility of crafting any new authorization. Unfortunately, the president's proposed AUMF is overly vague, and by failing to repeal or reform the 2001 authorization, it would leave a blank check for war in place.
Congress has to go back to the drawing board.
Any debate in Congress must include a comprehensive solution to ultimately degrade and dismantle ISIL. National security experts have been clear: There is no military solution to ISIL. We simply cannot neglect the political, diplomatic and economic strategies that are central to ending violent extremism.
In 2001, I was the only member of Congress to vote against the original AUMF. Days after the vote, I wrote an op-ed for the San Francisco Chronicle explaining, "Some believe this resolution was only symbolic, designed to show national resolve. But I could not ignore that it provided explicit authority, under the War Powers Resolution and the Constitution, to go to war."
In the ensuing decade, we have seen this authorization used over 30 times, including to legitimize warrantless surveillance, drone strikes around the globe, and unlawful detention in Guantanamo Bay.
It is abundantly clear that this resolution was not symbolic. It catapulted us into a global and endless war. Well over a decade later, we are still grappling with the consequences of our haste.
Let's not make the same mistake again. Congress needs to do its job by repealing the open-ended authorizations and seriously considering the costs and consequences of another open-ended war in the Middle East.
It's time to stop endless war.