AUMF In The Crosshairs

I have been calling for the end of the Authority to Use Military Force (AUMF) for years and I would expect that some Dems would be in the forefront of this effort….but nope….the Dems are taking a backseat to the radical GOPers…..

Some GOPers have introduced a plan to end our endless wars…..

A group of Republican senators on Thursday introduced a bill to repeal the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) that was passed in the wake of the September 11th attacks and is still being used to justify wars today.

The End Endless Wars Act was introduced by Senators Rand Paul (R-KY), Mike Lee (R-UT), JD Vance (R-OH), and Mike Braun (R-IN). The legislation would repeal the 2001 AUMF 180 days after its enactment.

“If there exists any desire to reclaim our Constitutional power and send a message to the world that we are a nation of peace, Congress should pass this bill and repeal the 2001 Authorization for war. After all, the 2001 AUMF never intended to authorize worldwide war, all the time, everywhere, forever,” said Sen. Paul, according to a press release from his office.

Sen. Lee said the 2001 AUMF has “become one of the many instruments of misuse, and it is time for members of Congress to end this authority that keeps us in endless wars.” Sen. Braun said that no president should “have the authority to singlehandedly wage war” and called to “return this power to the people and repeal this authorization that has far outlived its’ purpose.”

The 2001 AUMF currently authorizes war in Syria, Iraq, Somalia, Yemen, and several other countries. There’s been a push in Congress to repeal the 2002 AUMF that was used for the 2003 invasion of Iraq, but that authorization is not used today, and repealing it won’t end any current wars.

In March, the Senate voted to repeal the 2002 AUMF and the 1991 AUMF used for the Gulf War. At the time, Sen. Paul attempted to include an amendment to the legislation to repeal the 2001 AUMF, but it failed in a vote of 9-86.

(antiwar.com)

I do not care where the end comes from as long as the act is repealed.

But I fear this will go down in defeat as well….the defense industry has deep pockets and Congress has their hands out after all re-elections are coming up.

Even the Dems have become corruptible….especially from the arms people.

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

AUMF–The Long Good-bye

AUMF?

For those that spend more time worrying about what Tater Swifty is doing….AUMF stands for….Authorization for the Use of Military Force…..the power for the president to go to war with consulting Congress.

The US Senate has finally shown a little spine (something I never thought they were capable of doing)….

The Senate voted Wednesday to repeal the resolution that gave a green light for the 2003 invasion of Iraq, an effort to end more than 20 years of authorization for US presidents to use force in that country and return those war powers to Congress, reports the AP. The measure would repeal the 1991 authorization that sanctioned the US-led Gulf War as well. What you need to know:

Background. The October 2002 votes to give George W. Bush broad authority for the Iraq invasion were a defining moment for many members of Congress as the country debated whether a military strike was warranted. The US was already at war in Afghanistan, and the Bush administration had drummed up support among members of Congress and the American public for invading Iraq by promoting what turned out to be false intelligence alleging Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. Then-Sen. Joe Biden voted in favor.

Background II. Some lawmakers fear the Iraq war powers could be used for purposes Congress never intended. President Trump’s administration cited the 2002 Iraq war resolution as part of its legal justification for a 2020 US drone strike that killed Iranian Gen. Qassim Soleimani, but the two war powers resolutions have otherwise rarely been used as the basis for any presidential action. A separate 2001 authorization for the global war on terror would remain in place under the bill, which President Biden has said he will support.

Wednesday’s vote. Senators voted 66-30 in favor of repeal. If passed by the House, the repeal would not be expected to affect any current military deployments. But lawmakers in both parties are increasingly seeking to claw back congressional powers over US military strikes and deployments.

Supporters. Supporters, including almost 20 Republican senators, say the repeal is crucial to prevent future abuses and to reinforce that Iraq is now a strategic partner of the United States.

Critics. Opponents have raised concerns about recent attacks against US troops in Syria, including a recent drone strike and rocket attack that Iranian-backed militants are thought to have been behind. Biden and his administration have argued that the repeal would not affect any response to Iran. American troops are authorized to protect themselves and respond to attacks, including under Article 2 of the Constitution, which gives the president the authority to protect troops.

Prospects. The repeal’s future is less certain in the House, where 49 Republicans joined with Democrats in supporting a similar bill two years ago. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy has suggested he is open to supporting a repeal even though he previously opposed it, but Rep. Michael McCaul of Texas, the Republican chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, has indicated he would like to instead replace it with something else. It is unclear what that would be.

Congressional history. The New York Times reports that of the lawmakers who cast a vote for the 2002 Iraq war authorization, just 69 are still in Congress. Roughly half of them voted in favor of authorization. Today, all but 17 are in favor of repeal.

Implications. Should the repeal come to pass, “it would also be a crucial first step toward building momentum to tackle more significant and far more complicated endeavors,” such as “replacing the authorization Congress passed in 2001 to start military operations against terrorist groups in Afghanistan after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks,” notes the Times.

The best thing I can say about this issue is….It is about goddamn time!

I guess that makes me a peace-nik….

Peace campaigners cheered Wednesday’s vote by the U.S. Senate to repeal the authorizations for the 1991 and 2003 invasions of Iraq, while calling on the House of Representatives to follow suit.

https://www.commondreams.org/news/aumf-iraq

Enough Said!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

The Original AUMF

Part 2 —the untaught history of America.

Some think that the Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) was when the US retaliated for the 9/11 attacks on the US….if you think that then you are wrong….off by 200 years…..

First of all, what is the AUMF?

Basically it is a law from Congress that allows the use of military might against an ‘enemy’……

Now to the very first AUMF.

The year was 1801……

According to the United States Constitution, if a sitting president wants to use the U.S. military against another nation, the office holder must first ask Congress for a specific declaration of war.

The United States has only actually declared war a handful of times. Since its ratification, the Constitutional function of war has only been used against Great Britain in 1812, Mexico in 1846, Spain in 1898, the Triple Alliance powers in World War I and the Axis Powers in World War II. But the U.S. has engaged in more than 102 conflicts since its inception.

The problem with a declaration of war (for Congress) is that a state of war gives the Office of the President incredible power under the Constitution. Instead of doing that, legislators would prefer to give the president limited power using an Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF).

It’s the kind of legislation that has allowed presidents since George W. Bush to wage war for the past 20 years. But Authorizations for the use of military force are nothing new, though the names the U.S. government uses for it might be. The first AUMF-style authorization came before the first declared war, skirting the Constitution and allowing President Thomas Jefferson to bring the U.S. Navy to bear against American enemies.

Pirates from the coastal states of North Africa terrorized the Mediterranean Sea for centuries, even while the United States was still a colony of Great Britain. Ships from nations who refused to pay tribute to the Barbary Coast rulers were targeted for attack, their cargoes seized, and the crews sold into slavery.

America’s first authorization for use of military force came in 1801

So you see the AUMF is not something new….presidents have been using it for a couple of centuries….especially for wars that are not needed.

Class Dismissed!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

The New AUMF

AUMF–That is defined as the “Authority to Use Military Force.”

This post is for all those that are concerned about the use of nukes by Russia.

An AUMF is Congress way of passing the buck on war….so they can claim their hands are clean of war……there has been in the past a discussion about doing a way with the AUMF that was used to invade Iraq and the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan…..but you warhawks do not need to worry that your donors will go unrewarded for there is movement in the House…..

Congressman Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) announced a new Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF). If passed, the AUMF will allow President Joe Biden to deploy American troops to defend Ukraine if Russia uses chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons.

The Congressman issued a press release saying the legislation would establish important redlines and echoed Biden’s plea that “Putin must be stopped.”

“I’m introducing this AUMF as a clear redline so the Administration can take appropriate action should Russia use chemical, biological, and/or nuclear weapons. We must stand up for humanity and we must stand with our allies.

“As the President of the United States has said, Putin must be stopped. Accordingly, the Commander in Chief to the world’s greatest military should have the authority and means to take the necessary actions to do so.”

The bill titled “To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces to defend the territorial integrity of United States allies,” allows the President to determine if Russia has used WMDs. The AUMF terminates once the “President certifies to Congress that the territorial integrity of Ukraine has been restored.”

Similar to the 2002 AUMF, the legislation gives the President nearly a blank check to wage war. The bill does not include oversight on the determination of WMD use or sunset date.

Kinzinger announced the bill on Meet the Press, telling host Margret Brennan, “I don’t think we need to be using force in Ukraine right now. I just introduced an AUMF giving the president basically congressional leverage for permission to use it if WMDs, nuclear, biological or chemical are used in Ukraine.”

In a speech just days before voting for the 2002 AUMF, then-Senator Joe Biden likewise downplayed the risk President George W. Bush would use the authority to go to war in Iraq. “I will vote for this because we should be compelling Iraq to make good on its obligations to the United Nations…Approving this resolution does not mean that military action is imminent or unavoidable.”

(antiwar.com)

The defense industry rejoices…..the peasants weep…..

Anything to keep the money flowing into corporations…..the country be damned!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

AUMF In The Crosshairs

AUMF?

Authorization for the Use of Military Force.

You know that piece of crap that allows the US to attack and destroy anybody that we see fit.

In case you bare still confused then here is the Act in 60 words….

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/107/sjres23/text

(Another link that will go unused)

All I can say right now about this attempt…..it is about damn time!

Well after many years of my bitching and moaning it looks like there is a chance that the repel of this manure could be in the making.

The House has voted to end this abortion…… House voted to repeal the 2002 authorization for the use of military force (AUMF) that was used for the 2003 invasion of Iraq. The bill passed in a vote of 268 to 161, with 49 Republicans voting in favor of the repeal and only one Democrat voting against it.

Now it is time for the Senate is tackling the AUMF…..

In 2002, Chuck Schumer and Joe Biden were among the 29 Democratic senators who voted to authorize the use of military force in Iraq. Almost 20 years later, they support repealing the authorization. Schumer said Wednesday that he supports repealing the measure and the Senate will hold a vote on it this year, Politico reports. “The Iraq War has been over for nearly a decade,” the Senate majority leader said. “The authorization passed in 2002 is no longer necessary in 2021.” The House is expected to pass a bill to revoke the authorization Thursday, reports CNBC. President Biden has said he supports the House bill, which was sponsored by Democratic Rep. Barbara Lee.

The White House said in a statement that the US “has no ongoing military activities that rely solely on the 2002 AUMF as a domestic legal basis” and revoking the law would have “minimal impact” on operations. Schumer said Wednesday that revoking the authorization would not mean the US is turning its back on Iraq, but it would prevent future presidents “reaching back into the legal dustbin to use it as a justification for military adventurism,” the AP reports. He cited the Trump administration’s Jan. 2020 strike that killed Iranian Gen. Qassim Soleimani in Baghdad as an example. Some lawmakers say it’s also time to consider replacing the 2001 authorization of military force against terrorists with a more targeted resolution, CNN reports. Lee was the only House lawmaker to vote against the 2001 bill, which was passed three days after the 9/11 attacks.

This repeal could cease some of the willy-nilly use of force around the world by the US….

Not to worry….this repeal will not stop US intervention…..they always can invoke the UN charter….President Joe Biden also has other tools that allow him to take “defensive” actions, including Article II of the Constitution and Article 51 of the United Nations Charter

Will this lessen our involvement in situations we need to avoid…..probably not…if the M-IC wants an invasion then they will most likely get their money maker of an invasion.

Personally I think this is nothing more than a fart in a hurricane.

Watch This Blog!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Revisit AUMF

AUMF? Authorization for the Use of Military Force

This is the go ahead and attack when ever it is needed (?).

But who decides when to invoke?

Biden ha decided that it is time to revisit the AUMF (something that I applaud)…..

In the face of a new push in Congress to revise the Executive Branch’s war powers, the White House is signaling it is willing to cooperate on the issue.

On Friday, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki responded to a bipartisan bill introduced in the Senate by Senator Tim Kaine (D-VA). The legislation would repeal two authorizations for the use of military force (AUMF) for Iraq, the 1991 AUMF passed for the Gulf War, and the 2002 AUMF used for the Iraq invasion.

“We are committed to working with Congress to ensure that the authorizations for the use of military force currently on the books are replaced with a narrow and specific framework that will ensure we can protect Americans from terrorist threats while ending the forever wars,” Psaki wrote on Twitter.

One AUMF not addressed in Kaine’s bill is the 2001 AUMF that was passed for the war in Afghanistan and kicked off the War on Terror. The 2001 AUMF is by far the most abused and is still used today to fight ISIS, a group that didn’t exist when it was passed.

White House Open to Revising War Powers

As part of this revisit….Biden has ordered a temporary use of drones…..

President Biden has imposed temporary limits on drone strikes, and covert raids in country’s outside of major war zones as the new administration reviews the policies left by the Trump administration.

The limits mean the CIA and military must get permission from the White House before they carry out drone strikes or raids in places the US does not have a major military presence, like Somalia and Yemen. The limits don’t apply to Syria, Iraq, or Afghanistan.

The Biden administration has not announced these limits. The move was reported this week by The New York Times and The Washington Post. According to the reports, National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan imposed the limits on January 20th, the day President Biden was inaugurated.

Biden Orders Temporary Limits on Drone Strikes Outside of War Zones

Another decision that I applaud.

Now the decision has been made to revisit the AUMF then maybe it would be a good idea to do this thing right…..

Longtime advocates for a more peaceful U.S. foreign policy expressed cautious optimism Friday following news that President Joe Biden intends to work with Congress to repeal some of the authorizations that have enabled decades of unending U.S. war and military operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere.

White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said Friday that Biden seeks to “ensure that the authorizations for the use of military force currently on the books are replaced with a narrow and specific framework that will ensure we can protect Americans from terrorist threats while ending the forever wars.”

The statement was a remarkable departure from previous administrations. The United States has been continuously at war ever since every member of Congress except Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) voted for the post-9/11 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) that empowered then-president George W. Bush to invade Afghanistan in October 2001 and launch the worldwide so-called “War on Terror.”

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2021/03/05/we-need-make-sure-its-done-right-peace-advocates-welcome-biden-move-limit-war-powers

The problem is the M-IC has a strong voice in Congress and deep pockets….that is a lethal combination for a defeat of any revision to the AUMF.

Just to let you know…..

The paper, “Capitalizing on conflict: How defense contractors and foreign nations lobby for arms sales,” details how a network of lobbyists and donors steered $285 million in campaign contributions and $2.5 billion in lobbying spending over the last two decades, as well as hiring more than 200 lobbyists who previously worked in government.

The amount of money at stake is immense, both at home and abroad, the center states on its website, OpenSecrets.org. Not only is a significant portion of the Pentagon’s $740 billion annual budget spent on weapons, the report explains, but American defense firms agreed to sell $175 billion in weapons to other countries over the last year. That includes deals to sell $23 billion in F-35 Joint Strike Fighters and drones to the United Arab Emirates, and billions more in sales to Taiwan and Saudi Arabia, it adds.

https://www.military.com/daily-news/2021/03/07/how-biggest-arms-manufacturers-steer-millions-influence-us-policy.html

Sadly I do not expect much of a change from the powers that be….war is great business……Biden will go with the flow from the past.

Be Smart!

Learn Stuff!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Will It Be Perpetual War?

IN the beginning war could only be declared by act of Congress and then along came the attacks of 9/11 and the Congress gave their powers up to the president to declare war whenever the mood struck him.

The Authorization for the Use Of Military Force (AUMF) gave the president unlimited power to decide what was a war and when to go fight…..the Congress took a backseat….

In 2018 a bi-partisan bill has taken a new step forward…..

In the near future, Congress will debate a new Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF). I use the word “debate” lightly. So far, no hearings have been scheduled, and no testimony is likely to be heard unless something changes. That’s a shame, because this is a serious matter, and this is a deeply flawed AUMF.

For some time now, Congress has abdicated its responsibility to declare war. The status quo is that we are at war anywhere and anytime the president says so.

So Congress—in a very Congress way of doing things—has a “solution.” Instead of reclaiming its constitutional authority, it instead intends to codify the unacceptable, unconstitutional status quo.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/rand-paul-congress-moves-to-give-the-president-unlimited-war-powers/

Yes I wrote that this was a bi-partisan bill……so how do the Dems fit into this bill?

If there is any surprise that Senate Democrats, most of whom are virtually indistinguishable from pro-war Republicans, are about to coalesce in support of the newest version of the Authority for the Use of Military Force of 2018 (AUMF), then you have seriously not been paying attention.

The proposed AUMF of 2018 would replace AUMF 2001 and repeal AUMF 2002 while it will codify an “uninterrupted authority to use all necessary and appropriate force in armed conflict” against the Taliban, al Qaeda, ISIS and as yet unidentified “designated associated forces” who might “pose a grave threat to the US” in whatever country they occupy.

https://www.commondreams.org/views/2018/04/25/democratic-partys-war-history-and-aumf-2018

There is a provision in the new AUMF that has a disturbing consequence…..

……..a bipartisan group of six lawmakers, led by Sens. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., and Tim Kaine, D-Va., is proposing a new AUMF that would greatly expand who the president can place in indefinite military detention, allin the name of restricting presidential power. If the Corker-Kaine bill becomes law as currently written, any president, including Donald Trump, could plausibly claim extraordinarily broad power to order the military to imprison any U.S. citizen, captured in America or not, and hold them without charges essentially forever.

https://theintercept.com/2018/05/01/ndaa-2018-aumf-detention/

I smell a challenge to this new attempt…..does not seem to be in the spirit of the Constitution…..

But we will see……it looks like more of the same or in other words….perpetual war.

A War Blank Check

WE Americans have been constantly lied to so that this country can intervene around the world….accomplish regime change almost yearly……

Official Washington and those associated with it have misrepresented the facts numerous times in the service of military actions that might not otherwise have taken place. In the Middle East, these interventions have killed hundreds of thousands of innocent Arab civilians, brought chaos to Iraq and Libya, and led to the expulsion of a million Christians from communities where they have lived since biblical times.

The most famous of these episodes, of course, was the U.S. government’s assurance to the world that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, which formed the basis for the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq. The government also insisted Saddam had ties to al-Qaeda, bolstering the call to war. Of course neither was true.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-pretty-little-lies-behind-americas-interventions/

Lies that we citizens allow to go on so that we can keep some sort of mental defense our stupidity.

And now war will be easier….and our troops will die more easily thanx to a couple of cowards in the Congress.

The Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) was originally to be used by the president in a limited way….that has long been overstepped……and now the Congress has a new form of the AUMF before it….and this new attempt will do nothing to help the separation of powers……

The potential for the United States to stumble into a new war—or wars—has rarely been greater. Since before he took office, Donald Trump has been rattling his saber, and he is now backed up by a national security advisor who is openly spoiling for a fight. Instability and violence around the world are presenting them with ample opportunities. Last week marked the second time President Trump ordered bombings of Syria without congressional authorization.

Congress is now poised to bring a lit match to this combustible mix. A bill introduced yesterday by Sens. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., and Tim Kaine, D-Va., would give the president a virtual blank check to expand the current war against various terrorist groups to new enemies and new locations of the president’s choosing.

https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2018/04/corker-kaine-bill-aumf-forever-war/147516/

This should unacceptable to the American people but as usual they have their heads in the asses and our troops will be thrown at every event that the president feels it necessary…..Congress is relinquishing their power to the president…..

Cowards everyone!

Where’s The Money?

The time draws closer for the Congress to take up the issue of military funding….that is cash that we will need to funding all the wars we are now fighting and the ones on the horizon awaiting approval to be fought.

It appears that there are a few in Congress that want the AUMF to be addressed before any funding is approved….

Senate officials are hoping to get to a final vote on the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), a military spending bill in excess of $700 billion. Getting to that vote, however, means dealing with all the military and war-related amendments in the bill.

Senate leaders appear to have decided that the easiest way to get around this is to severely curtail debate on certain particularly controversial issues, with an 89-3 vote today agreeing to limit procedural debates on the matter.

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) is trying to manage the debate, which is to say, dramatically curtail the debate. There are still major issues to be settled, however, with Sens. Rand Paul (R-KY) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) both pushing major debates, on war authorization and transgender soldiers, respectively.

Sen. Paul intends to repeal the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF). The amendment is seen as politically awkward for some hawks, who argue that they want to create a new AUMF that explicitly covers current wars, but who are reluctant to see any limitations placed on the way America’s wars are waged.

(antiwar.com)

That’s the 2001 AUMF problem all over. Though on paper it was intended to only cover 9/11 and the Afghan War, the authorization has been used by all presidents since as carte blanche to wage any war, anywhere on earth, in which the term terrorism can remotely be applied.

There is no secret if you are a regular here on IST that I am a definite antiwar person…..while I do not agree with muich the Sen. Paul offers up as policy I do appreciate his stand in the AUMF……

As Congress takes up the 2018 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), I will insist it vote on my amendment to sunset the 2001 and 2002 Authorizations for the Use of Military Force.

Why?

Because these authorizations to use military force are inappropriately being used to justify American warfare in 7 different countries. Sunsetting both AUMFs will force a debate on whether we continue the Afghanistan war, the Libya war, the Yemen war, the Syria war, and other interventions.

Our military trains our soldiers to be focused and disciplined, yet the politicians who send them to fight have for years ignored those traits when developing our foreign policy.

Source: Rand Paul: Why we must repeal the 16-year-old Authorization for the Use of Military Force | Rare

Personally, I think any new conflict we must fight must be authorized by Congress….there should be NO blanket authorization.

Update: After writing this draft news came down about the defeat of this proposal….

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) had to push heavily and very publicly against the Senate leadership to get even the limited debate that ultimately occurred on his amendment, aiming to revoke the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF). The vote did not occur. In the middle of the debate Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN) moved to table (kill) the amendment, forcing an immediate vote. The Senate then voted to kill Paul’s amendment, by a vote of 61-36.

The post-9/11 AUMF has been interpreted broadly by US presidents as allowing unlimited war-making powers against anything even loosely described as “terror.” Sen. Paul argued that the AUMF was wrongly been used to authorize seven distinct wars, and that repealing it would force Congress to debate specific authorizations for specific wars as an alternative.

While he’d hoped this would bring in support not only from opponents of the war, but from hawks eager to get their votes on the record to authorize these many, effectively unauthorized wars, little support ultimately materialized. In addition to Sen. Paul, speaking in favor during the debate were Sens. Ben Cardin (D-MD), Chris Murphy (D-CT), and Dick Durban (D-IL).

While the failure of the amendment doesn’t preclude future efforts at passing new AUMFs to cover America’s many wars, it makes such debate a less pressing matter. Talk of an AUMF for the ISIS wars, put off since the 2014 mid-term elections on various reasons, can be expected to remain just talk, and no real advance on the effort is likely.

(antiwar.com)

This seems to get a little more popular every time they try to bring it up for a vote……hopefully the Congress will come to its senses eventually.

The Vote That Had No Chance

For months I have writing that the Congress needs to get off their butts and do something about the AUMF….that we have enough wars already and need to start voting on the use of military force.

Congresspeople like Gabbard and Sanders and few others have tried in the past but have come up short….then this session Rep. Lee offered up the proposal yet again……and it has a chance…..don’t that beat all?

No one was more surprised than Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) on Thursday when her language revoking the administration’s war authority was unexpectedly backed by Republicans and added to a must-pass defense spending bill.

Lee for years has attempted to shutter the law passed in the wake of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, but this week’s backing reflects shifting politics and unusual bipartisan support.

In Saner Thought

"It is the duty of every man, as far as his ability extends, to detect and expose delusion and error"..Thomas Paine

Tag: AUMF

AUMF In The Crosshairs

AUMF–The Long Good-bye

The Original AUMF

The New AUMF

AUMF In The Crosshairs

Revisit AUMF

Will It Be Perpetual War?

A War Blank Check

Where’s The Money?

The Vote That Had No Chance