Terrorist group wants to suck U.S.
into religious fight, Kucinich says,
warning against war authorization
WALL opposes congressional rubber-stamping
of ‘unconstitutional’ Obama wars in Iraq & Syria
WALL news & commentary
Obama’s request to Congress for an authorization of force (i.e. war)
against the group that calls itself the “Islamic State” got strong
opposition from a vocal member of his own party, ex-Representative
Dennis J. Kucinich.
went on Alan Colmes’s radio talk show on the Fox network February 25 to
warn against giving the “Islamic State” what it wanted from the United
States: an official war that it could call a crusade against Islam.
ISIS is trying to do is to draw the U.S. into a religious war so that
they can claim a position as defender of Islam against crusading foreign
invaders,...” Kucinich said. “The U.S. should not be playing into
ISIS’s hands…. A military attack on ISIS would bring even more jihadis
from all over the world into ISIS ranks.” He saw the administration
leading the U.S. into a state of perpetual war.
who served eight terms as a representative from Ohio and an avid
antiwar voice in Congress, was preparing an open letter to his former
colleagues, giving reasons to reject the president’s request for a
formal war measure.
wondered how much support Kucinich (a Democrat) could get in the
current Congress (both houses being under Republican control). “I think
that there are people on both sides of the political spectrum who are
very concerned about the action the administration is taking,” Kucinich
don’t know why the Obama administration would have any credibility left
at all once they bumbled the situation in Libya. They misrepresented
what happened. They lied to the American people at the cost of the
disintegration of a country.” (What was initially presented to the
United Nations as a “no-fly zone” for humanitarian reasons soon became a
war to overthrow the regime and kill its leader.)
ISIS stands for “Islamic State of Iraq and Syria.” Obama uses ISIL, which replaces “Syria” with “the Levant.”
Kucinich spoke at WALL’s October 2014 event in San Francisco. (See articles below.)
‘llegal’ wars assailed
War and Law League called the warfare started by Obama in Iraq, Syria,
and elsewhere unconstitutional and impeachable. An authority cited
for that allegation was Obama himself, some seven years earlier.
rubber-stamp his actions would be to encourage more lawless wars – and
make the U.S. less safe, WALL declared in letters to selected members of
Congress. This is the text of the letters:
Congress accommodate the President by authorizing more years of war in
the Middle East, after some 13 years of U.S. combat there?
say no: Unilateral, presidential wars in Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Libya etc.
have been unconstitutional and impeachable. Congress should not rubber-stamp such actions. To do so would encourage more of the same.
President’s request for authorization for his latest wars—his proposed
bill appears to be nearly a blank check—implies that he knows they’re
illegal. Indeed, in December 2007, then Senator Obama rightly told the
Boston Globe in a written statement:
President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally
authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve
stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.
When hostages or other innocents are murdered, law enforcement agencies should find the murderers and bring them to justice.
attacks on communities, hitting civilians and fighters
indiscriminately, are war crimes, more deadly than the terrorist acts.
Our attacks don’t end terrorist groups but gain them recruits. That’s
shown by many thousands of bombing raids on Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan
etc. U.S. wars since 2001 have brought us nothing but a myriad of
Every action has a reaction. Thus U.S. war in the Middle East makes us increasingly unsafe. Staying out and minding our own business would make us safer.
The question should be fully and openly debated in Congress.
letters quoted James Madison, who wrote in 1793, “… The power to
declare war, including the power of judging the causes of war, is fully and
exclusively vested in the legislature…. The executive has no
right, in any case, to decide the question, whether there is or is not
cause for declaring war.”
WALL’s Legislative Committee sent the letters to 45 senators and representatives by fax on February 11 and 12.
‘Ground combat’ to come
have directed a comprehensive and sustained strategy to degrade and
defeat ISIL,” President Obama tells Congress in a written memo. “As part
of this strategy, U.S. military forces are conducting a systematic
campaign of airstrikes against ISIL, in Iraq and Syria.”
is a war and Congress did not authorize it. In the memo, Obama claims
that his authority to launch his “campaign” comes from existing
statutes, but he does not cite any statute.
says his proposed authorization for use of military force (i.e. war)
“would not authorize long-term, large-scale ground combat operations” as
in Afghanistan and Iraq. But his suggested joint resolution states
merely that “offensive ground combat operations” will not be “enduring”;
it says nothing about its scale. The authorization lasts three years
“unless reauthorized. The enemy includes “associated persons or forces”
as well as ISIL (ISIS) itself.
proposed resolution begins with 13 “Whereas” paragraphs. They list
types of violent crimes by the “ISIL” group, quote its intention to
conduct terrorist attacks internationally, and claim that the
president’s attacks on Iraq and Syria have been in “self-defense.”
specific evidence is presented that the group poses an imminent or
special danger to the United States or is capable of inflicting great
harm to this country — or that international terrorism will succumb to
more U.S. warfare abroad after some 13 years of it in Afghanistan, Iraq,
and other lands. Of course, nothing is said of any measures taken to
prevent war in accord with the United Nations Charter.
The effective provisions of the proposed resolution follow:
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This joint resolution may be cited as the “Authorization for Use of
Military Force against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.”
SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.
(a) AUTHORIZATION.—The President is authorized, subject to the
limitations in subsection (c), to use the Armed Forces of the United
States as the President determines to be necessary and appropriate
against ISIL or associated persons or forces as defined in section 5.
(b) WAR POWERS RESOLUTION REQUIREMENTS.—
(1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION.—Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of
the War Powers Resolution (50 U.S.C. 1547 (a)(1)), Congress declares
that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory
authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers
Resolution (50 U.S.C. 1544(b)).
(2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS.—Nothing in this resolution
supersedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution (50 U.S.C. 1541
The authority granted in subsection (a) does not authorize the use of
the United States Armed Forces in enduring offensive ground combat
SEC. 3. DURATION OF THIS AUTHORIZATION
This authorization for the use of military force shall terminate three
years after the date of the enactment of this joint resolution, unless
SEC. 4. REPORTS.
The President shall report to Congress at least once every six months on specific actions taken pursuant to this authorization.
SEC. 5. ASSOCIATED PERSONS OR FORCES DEFINED.
>In this joint resolution, the term ‘‘associated persons or forces’’
means individuals and organizations fighting for, on behalf of, or
alongside ISIL or any closely-related successor entity in hostilities
against the United States or its coalition partners.
SEC. 6. REPEAL OF AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE AGAINST IRAQ.
The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of
2002 (Public Law 107– 243; 116 Stat. 1498; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note) is
Feb. 27, 2015
RETURN TO ATRICLE OF ORIGIN