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
 

saturnsring

(1,832 posts)
13. Text of Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002
Mon Nov 2, 2015, 08:02 PM
Nov 2015

HJ 114 IH



107th CONGRESS



2d Session



H. J. RES. 114

To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq.



IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES




OCTOBER 2, 2002

Mr. HASTERT (for himself and Mr. GEPHARDT) introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on International Relations




JOINT RESOLUTION

To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq.

Whereas in 1990 in response to Iraq’s war of aggression against and illegal occupation of Kuwait, the United States forged a coalition of nations to liberate Kuwait and its people in order to defend the national security of the United States and enforce United Nations Security Council resolutions relating to Iraq;

Whereas after the liberation of Kuwait in 1991, Iraq entered into a United Nations sponsored cease-fire agreement pursuant to which Iraq unequivocally agreed, among other things, to eliminate its nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons programs and the means to deliver and develop them, and to end its support for international terrorism;

Whereas the efforts of international weapons inspectors, United States intelligence agencies, and Iraqi defectors led to the discovery that Iraq had large stockpiles of chemical weapons and a large scale biological weapons program, and that Iraq had an advanced nuclear weapons development program that was much closer to producing a nuclear weapon than intelligence reporting had previously indicated;

Whereas Iraq, in direct and flagrant violation of the cease-fire, attempted to thwart the efforts of weapons inspectors to identify and destroy Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction stockpiles and development capabilities, which finally resulted in the withdrawal of inspectors from Iraq on October 31, 1998;

Whereas in 1998 Congress concluded that Iraq’s continuing weapons of mass destruction programs threatened vital United States interests and international peace and security, declared Iraq to be in ‘material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations’ and urged the President ‘to take appropriate action, in accordance with the Constitution and relevant laws of the United States, to bring Iraq into compliance with its international obligations’ (Public Law 105-235);

Whereas Iraq both poses a continuing threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region and remains in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations by, among other things, continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons capability, actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability, and supporting and harboring terrorist organizations;

Whereas Iraq persists in violating resolutions of the United Nations Security Council by continuing to engage in brutal repression of its civilian population thereby threatening international peace and security in the region, by refusing to release, repatriate, or account for non-Iraqi citizens wrongfully detained by Iraq, including an American serviceman, and by failing to return property wrongfully seized by Iraq from Kuwait;

Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people;

Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its continuing hostility toward, and willingness to attack, the United States, including by attempting in 1993 to assassinate former President Bush and by firing on many thousands of occasions on United States and Coalition Armed Forces engaged in enforcing the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council;

Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;

Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of American citizens;

Whereas the attacks on the United States of September 11, 2001, underscored the gravity of the threat posed by the acquisition of weapons of mass destruction by international terrorist organizations;

Whereas Iraq’s demonstrated capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction, the risk that the current Iraqi regime will either employ those weapons to launch a surprise attack against the United States or its Armed Forces or provide them to international terrorists who would do so, and the extreme magnitude of harm that would result to the United States and its citizens from such an attack, combine to justify action by the United States to defend itself;

Whereas United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 authorizes the use of all necessary means to enforce United Nations Security Council Resolution 660 and subsequent relevant resolutions and to compel Iraq to cease certain activities that threaten international peace and security, including the development of weapons of mass destruction and refusal or obstruction of United Nations weapons inspections in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 687, repression of its civilian population in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 688, and threatening its neighbors or United Nations operations in Iraq in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 949;

Whereas Congress in the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1) has authorized the President ‘to use United States Armed Forces pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 (1990) in order to achieve implementation of Security Council Resolutions 660, 661, 662, 664, 665, 666, 667, 669, 670, 674, and 677’;

Whereas in December 1991, Congress expressed its sense that it ‘supports the use of all necessary means to achieve the goals of United Nations Security Council Resolution 687 as being consistent with the Authorization of Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1),’ that Iraq’s repression of its civilian population violates United Nations Security Council Resolution 688 and ‘constitutes a continuing threat to the peace, security, and stability of the Persian Gulf region,’ and that Congress, ‘supports the use of all necessary means to achieve the goals of United Nations Security Council Resolution 688’;

Whereas the Iraq Liberation Act (Public Law 105-338) expressed the sense of Congress that it should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove from power the current Iraqi regime and promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime;

Whereas on September 12, 2002, President Bush committed the United States to ‘work with the United Nations Security Council to meet our common challenge’ posed by Iraq and to ‘work for the necessary resolutions,’ while also making clear that ‘the Security Council resolutions will be enforced, and the just demands of peace and security will be met, or action will be unavoidable’;

Whereas the United States is determined to prosecute the war on terrorism and Iraq’s ongoing support for international terrorist groups combined with its development of weapons of mass destruction in direct violation of its obligations under the 1991 cease-fire and other United Nations Security Council resolutions make clear that it is in the national security interests of the United States and in furtherance of the war on terrorism that all

relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions be enforced, including through the use of force if necessary;

Whereas Congress has taken steps to pursue vigorously the war on terrorism through the provision of authorities and funding requested by the President to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such persons or organizations;

Whereas the President and Congress are determined to continue to take all appropriate actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such persons or organizations;

Whereas the President has authority under the Constitution to take action in order to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States, as Congress recognized in the joint resolution on Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40); and

Whereas it is in the national security of the United States to restore international peace and security to the Persian Gulf region: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,


SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This joint resolution may be cited as the ‘Authorization for the Use of Military Force Against Iraq’.


SEC. 2. SUPPORT FOR UNITED STATES DIPLOMATIC EFFORTS.

The Congress of the United States supports the efforts by the President to--

(1) strictly enforce through the United Nations Security Council all relevant Security Council resolutions applicable to Iraq and encourages him in those efforts; and

(2) obtain prompt and decisive action by the Security Council to ensure that Iraq abandons its strategy of delay, evasion and noncompliance and promptly and strictly complies with all relevant Security Council resolutions.


SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

(a) AUTHORIZATION- The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to--

(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and

(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.

(b) PRESIDENTIAL DETERMINATION- In connection with the exercise of the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President shall, prior to such exercise or as soon thereafter as may be feasible, but no later than 48 hours after exercising such authority, make available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate his determination that--

(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq; and

(2) acting pursuant to this resolution is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorists attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.

(c) WAR POWERS RESOLUTION REQUIREMENTS-

(1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION- Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution.

(2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS- Nothing in this resolution supersedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution.


SEC. 4. REPORTS TO CONGRESS.

(a) The President shall, at least once every 60 days, submit to the Congress a report on matters relevant to this joint resolution, including actions taken pursuant to the exercise of authority granted in section 3 and the status of planning for efforts that are expected to be required after such actions are completed, including those actions described in section 7 of Public Law 105-338 (the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998).

(b) To the extent that the submission of any report described in subsection (a) coincides with the submission of any other report on matters relevant to this joint resolution otherwise required to be submitted to Congress pursuant to the reporting requirements of Public Law 93-148 (the War Powers Resolution), all such reports may be submitted as a single consolidated report to the Congress.

(c) To the extent that the information required by section 3 of Public Law 102-1 is included in the report required by this section, such report shall be considered as meeting the requirements of section 3 of Public Law 102-1.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

I saw the one where she voted for it just to get the inspectors in Autumn Nov 2015 #1
That level of dishonesty about a war vote is dishonorable beyond words. merrily Nov 2015 #4
No honest person who is old enough to post on a message board Autumn Nov 2015 #9
And then, there are some of the posts on this very thread. merrily Nov 2015 #30
Yes it it very dishonorable. n/t sabrina 1 Nov 2015 #24
Bush wasn't required to do jack shit Armstead Nov 2015 #2
Summaries for Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 saturnsring Nov 2015 #3
You should read the full resolution. The summary is less clear. Vattel Nov 2015 #10
"This is the Tonkin Gulf resolution all over again" - Robert Byrd jfern Nov 2015 #5
this stuff is mind blowing marym625 Nov 2015 #6
In one of his videos, Ben Ladin said he made up his mind to strike us when he saw the merrily Nov 2015 #34
I would hate us. marym625 Nov 2015 #92
I am surprised we have been as fortunate as we have. merrily Nov 2015 #95
I know people that have moved out of the US and renounced their citizenship marym625 Nov 2015 #108
That's what I call a statement. merrily Nov 2015 #110
Hillary did not simply vote to authorize the invasion, which would have been bad enough. merrily Nov 2015 #7
good point! Vattel Nov 2015 #8
Specifically she said that there was a Saddam Al Qaeda connection jfern Nov 2015 #32
ty 840high Nov 2015 #38
She didn't just vote for it. She pounded the drums on the floor of the Senate. Scuba Nov 2015 #11
I very much doubt she thought that speech would sway the vote of a Senator. merrily Nov 2015 #31
Bingo! Scuba Nov 2015 #50
It's amazing the turds some people will try to polish up, after the fact. Warren DeMontague Nov 2015 #12
There's really no way to apologize for it, either. Unnumbered Iraqis injured, killed, merrily Nov 2015 #25
You don't have to tell me. Warren DeMontague Nov 2015 #44
Yes, ludicrous and shameful, like some of the posts on this very thread. merrily Nov 2015 #45
Text of Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 saturnsring Nov 2015 #13
That's better. Vattel Nov 2015 #14
i just wanted to post it so people can read it saturnsring Nov 2015 #18
Yes, I assumed so. Thanks. Vattel Nov 2015 #37
What I remember is that in 2002 shortly before the mid-terms, madinmaryland Nov 2015 #15
Hillary wasn't up for election for 4 years, she had no excuse about the immediate election jfern Nov 2015 #33
The political climate was completely different in 2002 than it is now or even in 2008. madinmaryland Nov 2015 #36
Back then far too many who voted for the Iraq War tried to claim SheilaT Nov 2015 #16
I don't call it revisionist history. I call it lies. CharlotteVale Nov 2015 #17
That's just because it is. Kalidurga Nov 2015 #55
And she can't wash that blood off of her hands... Yurovsky Nov 2015 #86
It makes no sense to me. Kalidurga Nov 2015 #91
Bush was elected a second term even after his R B Garr Nov 2015 #19
I think it is important to correct the record. You are free to disagree. Vattel Nov 2015 #22
His "malfeasance" was exposed to political junkies, the ones who post on message boards and merrily Nov 2015 #28
OMFG seriously keep this up, the sermonizing R B Garr Nov 2015 #35
I'm not having any trouble with selective memory, telling the truth or assessing morality of a bad merrily Nov 2015 #39
Ugh, the pious dishonesty is a waste of time. R B Garr Nov 2015 #56
Um you did the same thing in Reply 35. The difference is I posted some support from my statements. merrily Nov 2015 #57
YOUR emotions are not support. R B Garr Nov 2015 #60
I posted links and info. If posting emotions is possible at all, it's more your area than mine. merrily Nov 2015 #62
You edited then, what a croc R B Garr Nov 2015 #63
Now you're just making up stuff about what my prior posts said. Good thing everyone can read them. merrily Nov 2015 #65
What a joke. You got caught being R B Garr Nov 2015 #72
Bush was never elected Hydra Nov 2015 #46
LOL, now I'm "defending" R B Garr Nov 2015 #59
Lol Hydra Nov 2015 #64
Typical nonsense. Too silly to take seriously R B Garr Nov 2015 #77
If IWR was a vote for war, why was IRAQ invaded by Hans Blix and the U.N. Weapons Inspectors BlueStateLib Nov 2015 #20
Do you disagree with something I wrote? If so, please specify. Vattel Nov 2015 #21
And your point is? Read the AUMF. It counts a hell of a lot more than the ass-covering bloviation merrily Nov 2015 #27
Come on, who are you trying to kid. Warren DeMontague Nov 2015 #48
Bernie showed more wisdom than any one of those senators, even JDPriestly Nov 2015 #61
To answer your question: Martin Eden Nov 2015 #93
Kicked and recommended. Uncle Joe Nov 2015 #23
That vote, which she cast no doubt thinking of her own political future, lost her the last election. sabrina 1 Nov 2015 #26
I hope so. 840high Nov 2015 #40
The UN weapons inspectors in Iraq at the time were shouting from the rooftops "There are no WMD" AgingAmerican Nov 2015 #29
Someone posted today that Clinton 840high Nov 2015 #41
She has compassion when it polls high AgingAmerican Nov 2015 #43
Her vote aligned with the wishes of PNAC, the DLC and its kin, the Progressive Policy Institute. merrily Nov 2015 #54
There were no weapons inspectors in Iraq until after IWR and UN Sec Res 1441. That's what those stevenleser Nov 2015 #66
The weapons inspectors were thrown out of iraq on the eve of the invasion AgingAmerican Nov 2015 #68
That's correct. They were admitted after IWR and UN Sec Res 1441 and were thrown out shortly stevenleser Nov 2015 #69
She is indulging in political CYA by claiming it was a "mistake". Tierra_y_Libertad Nov 2015 #42
and it requires EVERYONE to overlook her husbands daily briefings reddread Nov 2015 #85
The excuse is Saddam wouldn't have cooperated without a real threat.... Spitfire of ATJ Nov 2015 #47
The problem with your thinking is, that is exactly what was talked about at the time. stevenleser Nov 2015 #67
Not by me.... Spitfire of ATJ Nov 2015 #70
Yes, France voted for UN Sec Res 1441 within two weeks of IWR for the same purpose stevenleser Nov 2015 #71
That was a talking point of the time that Bush invaded to enforce 1441.... Spitfire of ATJ Nov 2015 #73
It was the text of the Resolution and France and Russia had a part in the negotiations about it. stevenleser Nov 2015 #74
They supported INSPECTIONS. Not INVASIONS Spitfire of ATJ Nov 2015 #75
Correct. nt stevenleser Nov 2015 #76
Her 20 minute speech on the Senate floor proves that she knew that Bush would use it. Major Hogwash Nov 2015 #79
The point is she thought it was the right thing to do until it was the wrong thing to do. Spitfire of ATJ Nov 2015 #81
Britain was already bombing radar installations in Northern Iraq in early August of 2002. Major Hogwash Nov 2015 #82
At least we know she didn't do it for the money.... Spitfire of ATJ Nov 2015 #83
Ha! That's a good one! Yurovsky Nov 2015 #88
Let's face it. Bernie was exceptional in the thought process and JDPriestly Nov 2015 #49
wow, very well-said Vattel Nov 2015 #53
Millions of people took to the streets to protest the Iraq Invasion Maedhros Nov 2015 #51
Scott Ritter BlueStateLib Nov 2015 #80
You want they should lay off revisionist history from 12 years ago? Kalidurga Nov 2015 #52
I heard she voted for the Iraq war to stop a federal marriage amendment portlander23 Nov 2015 #58
Yes Bush was given a blank check with the AUMF, it authorized using military force of which only one Thinkingabout Nov 2015 #78
The OP is about the Iraq War Resolution. More than one person voted against it. Vattel Nov 2015 #100
I heard it was to stop even worse war bill from being passed azurnoir Nov 2015 #84
Yeah, that's the ticket! Yurovsky Nov 2015 #87
This again? It doesn't appear that this is having the effect that Bernie's followers expect. NurseJackie Nov 2015 #89
Ikr? I wish certain Hillary supporters would stop distorting the record, Vattel Nov 2015 #90
Hillary supporters are turning a blind eye to a critically important issue. Martin Eden Nov 2015 #94
So, don't vote for her then. Your conscience will be clear. NurseJackie Nov 2015 #97
In matters of conscience the law of majority has no place. Gandhi Tierra_y_Libertad Nov 2015 #98
How can you vote for her in good conscience? Martin Eden Nov 2015 #99
Well … NurseJackie Nov 2015 #101
Well ... Martin Eden Nov 2015 #103
You misunderstood. NurseJackie Nov 2015 #104
I do agree ... Martin Eden Nov 2015 #105
Thank you for the conversation. I enjoyed chatting with you. NurseJackie Nov 2015 #106
Thanks, at least it was fairly civil (even if nothing was accomplished). n/t Martin Eden Nov 2015 #107
or opening them either Motown_Johnny Nov 2015 #96
And they knew it HassleCat Nov 2015 #102
So what. Dem2 Nov 2015 #109
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Please, no more revisions...»Reply #13