Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)Obama Sees Iraq Resolution as a Legal Basis for Airstrikes, Official Says [View all]
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/13/world/americas/obama-sees-iraq-resolution-as-a-legal-basis-for-airstrikes-official-says.html?_r=1The president may rely on the 2001 A.U.M.F. as statutory authority for the military airstrike operations he is directing against I.S.I.S., the administration said in a written statement provided to The New York Times and attributed to a senior administration official. As we have explained, the 2002 Iraq A.U.M.F. would serve as an alternative statutory authority basis on which the president may rely for military action in Iraq. Even so, our position on the 2002 A.U.M.F. hasnt changed and wed like to see it repealed.
Congress based its authorization of the Iraq war on the government of Saddam Husseins supposed possession of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons. The war evolved into a grinding battle against insurgents before American forces withdrew in 2011, and one of those insurgent groups was Al Qaeda in Iraq, which later renamed itself ISIS.
Legal specialists said the validity of the claim that the Iraq authorization covers ISIS will depend on whether the bombing is a resumption of the old war or the start of a new one. In June, the White House said the Iraq authorization is no longer used for any U.S. government activities.
Ryan Goodman, a New York University law professor, called the theory a stretch and politically awkward because, he said, it amounted to a concession that Mr. Obama was unsuccessful in closing out the conflict.
Congress based its authorization of the Iraq war on the government of Saddam Husseins supposed possession of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons. The war evolved into a grinding battle against insurgents before American forces withdrew in 2011, and one of those insurgent groups was Al Qaeda in Iraq, which later renamed itself ISIS.
Legal specialists said the validity of the claim that the Iraq authorization covers ISIS will depend on whether the bombing is a resumption of the old war or the start of a new one. In June, the White House said the Iraq authorization is no longer used for any U.S. government activities.
Ryan Goodman, a New York University law professor, called the theory a stretch and politically awkward because, he said, it amounted to a concession that Mr. Obama was unsuccessful in closing out the conflict.
Not sure how that works for bombing Syria...
21 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Obama Sees Iraq Resolution as a Legal Basis for Airstrikes, Official Says [View all]
grahamhgreen
Sep 2014
OP
He and his advisers are just throwing stuff against the wall to see what will stick.
amandabeech
Sep 2014
#17
I am actually worried what'll happen to the Premies on this board come Jan. 2017
MisterP
Sep 2014
#15
Could you be so kind as to send me the quote or section that authorizes it?
grahamhgreen
Sep 2014
#18
So, if the action turns into a disaster, a Republican Congress could potentially lay the whole
grahamhgreen
Sep 2014
#21