Rand Paul and I Told You So

At least according to this snippet from WaPo, Jane Harman reported out after discussing war over “d’anjou pear salad and Chilean sea bass” that the President thinks he can rely on both his epistolary War Power Resolution letters and … the Iraq AUMF to wage war against ISIS. (h/t Lemon Slayer)

The president “thinks he has the legal authority he needs” to increase U.S. military engagement in both Iraq and Syria, said Jane Harman, president of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, who attended the dinner with Obama. The White House’s belief that it has authority to act is based on the reports Obama has filed with Congress under the War Powers Act and the earlier congressional authorization for the war in Iraq. [my emphasis]

Back in 2011, Rand Paul had the batshit crazy idea that, since we were ending the war in Iraq, we ought to repeal the AUMF that authorized the war. You never know, after all, when someone might pull that cobwebby AUMF out of a drawer and start using it again.

Not many of Paul’s colleagues agreed with him about this basic matter of AUMF hygiene.

From time to time over the last several years, I’ve reminded people about that dusty old AUMF lying around like Chekhov’s gun.

In 2012, when Obama officially told Congress the, “responsible withdrawal … in accordance with the 2008 Agreement Between the United States of America and the Republic of Iraq on the Withdrawal of United States Forces from Iraq and the Organization of Their Activities during Their Temporary Presence in Iraq,” had been completed, I suggested maybe that marked a good time to repeal that AUMF.

When, last year, Obama said — referring exclusively to the 2001 Afghanistan AUMF —

–mindful of James Madison’s warning that “No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.”

[snip]

I intend to engage Congress … in efforts to refine, and ultimately repeal, the AUMF’s mandate. 

I suggested maybe we could do a twofer and actually repeal both the Afghan and Iraq AUMFs at once.

Earlier this year, people started catching on, and Caitlin Hayden even claimed to Yahoo that they wanted to repeal the Iraq War.

It looked, for a brief period, like Obama might prove Paul and I wrong.

Nope.

Chekhov knew a fair bit about narrative. And you just can’t leave a loaded AUMF lying around before some tragic person picks it up and shoots it.

image_print
14 replies
  1. ess emm says:

    Oceania has always been at war with Iraq.

    Although I’m a very cynical person sometimes I don’t think I’m cynical enough.

  2. Don Bacon says:

    Perhaps Obama will explain why the US didn’t lift a finger to oppose ISIS for six months, in violation of the US/Iraq Strategic Framework Agreement
    Nov 26, 2007

    Declaration of Principles for a Long-Term Relationship of Cooperation and Friendship Between the Republic of Iraq and the United States of America
    .
    As Iraqi leaders confirmed in their Communiqué signed on August 26, 2007, and endorsed by President Bush, the Governments of Iraq and the United States are committed to developing a long-term relationship of cooperation and friendship as two fully sovereign and independent states with common interests. This relationship will serve the interest of coming generations based on the heroic sacrifices made by the Iraqi people and the American people for the sake of a free, democratic, pluralistic, federal, and unified Iraq.
    .
    The relationship of cooperation envisioned by the Republic of Iraq and the United States includes a range of issues, foremost of which is cooperation in the political, economic, cultural, and security fields, taking account of the following principles:
    .
    First: The Political, Diplomatic, and Cultural Spheres
    .
    1. Supporting the Republic of Iraq in defending its democratic system against internal and external threats….
    .
    Third: The Security Sphere
    .
    1. Providing security assurances and commitments to the Republic of Iraq to deter foreign aggression against Iraq that violates its sovereignty and integrity of its territories, waters, or airspace.
    .
    2. Supporting the Republic of Iraq in its efforts to combat all terrorist groups, at the forefront of which is Al-Qaeda, Saddamists, and all other outlaw groups regardless of affiliation, and destroy their logistical networks and their sources of finance, and defeat and uproot them from Iraq. This support will be provided consistent with mechanisms and arrangements to be established in the bilateral cooperation agreements mentioned herein. 3. Supporting the Republic of Iraq in training, equipping, and arming the Iraqi Security Forces to enable them to protect Iraq and all its peoples, and completing the building of its administrative systems, in accordance with the request of the Iraqi government.

  3. Don Bacon says:

    Obama could say: Hey, we funded ISIS using ex-Iraqi military troops, sort of a follow-on to the Sunni Awakening, to split up Iraq because it’s an Iran ally which we mistakenly created, So why destroy ISIS?
    .
    So I came up with a three-year plan, which I call a strategy. Three years is an eternity and I’ll be gone by then.
    .
    (He could say that, but instead he will lie. That’s expected.)

  4. Don Bacon says:

    With the War Powers Resolution, Congress abdicated much of its role in initiating wars, and presidents have even violated the WPR without any repercussions.
    .
    The Congress has become irrelevant in foreign affairs (except if Israel is involved). The treaty referenced in my #3 above was accomplished by Bush-43 acting in secret; the Senate was not involved as required by the constitution. It’s the same with Afghanistan.
    .
    It is a time of Executive Privilege, with presidents acting as kings. The public seems not to mind, because Congress is held in very low esteem, with an approval rating in the single digits. The are all bought-and-paid-for, and everyone knows it.

  5. Don Bacon says:

    Obama, as a constitutional scholar (supposedly), neglected to provide a better quote from James Madison, to wit:

    “Those who are to conduct a war cannot in the nature of things, be proper or safe judges, whether a war ought to be commenced, continued, or concluded. They are barred from the latter functions by a great principle in free government, analogous to that which separates the sword from the purse, or the power of executing from the power of enacting laws.”

      • wallace says:

        quote” ….analogous to that which separates the sword from the purse, or the power of executing from the power of enacting laws.”

        Speaking of swords…

        quote”Chekhov knew a fair bit about narrative. And you just can’t leave a loaded AUMF lying around before some tragic person picks it up and shoots it.”unquote

        emptywheels lightning quick sword of wit strikes again.

    • wallace says:

      quote”Excuse my blatant ignorance but don’t these things have to be re authorized occasionally?”unquote

      Re-authorized? We don nee no stinkin re-authorizations !

      • scribe says:

        No. By their terms, both the September 11 AUMF and the Iraq AUMF have no expiration date.

        But, more to the point, Obama wants to expand his Article II powers so he won’t want to go to Congress for anything.

        • wallace says:

          quote”No. By their terms, both the September 11 AUMF and the Iraq AUMF have no expiration date.”unquote

          That was the point of my joke.

  6. wallace says:

    quote”Earlier this year, people started catching on, and Caitlin Hayden even claimed to Yahoo that they wanted to repeal the Iraq War.”unquote

    ummm…can someone please explain to me how you “repeal” a war?????????????

Comments are closed.