(14.9.2018) Seventeen years ago the US went to war on the strength of a single sentence: 60 words that were written, debated, and voted upon before the US even knew for certain who was behind the 9/11 attacks. In those panic-stricken early days, action mattered more than knowledge. And on Sept. 14, 2001, three days after the attacks and with the rubble in New York and Washington still smoking, Congress passed the Authorization for Use of Military Force, or AUMF, by an overwhelming margin: 98–0 in the Senate, and 420–1 in the House.
(5.10.2018) Three years ago, during the presidency of Barack Obama, partisan opinions were nearly the reverse: 42% of Democrats said the U.S. had succeeded, compared with 29% of Republicans.
An abrupt U.S. military withdrawal would ease pressure on the Taliban and threaten women’s rights: Our view
(31.8.2017) Mercenaries are back, a dangerous trend occurring in the shadows. Their very lack of accountability is their main selling point; they offer plausible deniability and brute force to those too weak or squeamish to wage war. Customers are buying too, with mercenary proliferation in Afghanistan, Congo, Iraq, Nigeria, Somalia, Syria, Ukraine and Yemen. Clients include countries, extractive industry and even terrorists. This trend may one day alter international relations: When anyone can rent a military, then super-rich and large corporations can become a new kind of superpower. Worse, mercenaries can start and elongate conflicts for profit, breeding endless war. A world with more mercenaries means a world with more war, which is why Prince’s proposal is so dangerous.
(11.7.2018) Three days after the attacks, the United States Congress passed the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force that set the stage for the invasion of Afghanistan. I didn’t understand what war really was or what it would mean for the future of our nation.
As it turns out, neither did Congress. Instead of a limited campaign against al-Qaida and the Taliban, the 2001 war authorization became the legal justification used by three very different presidents for U.S. military action across the world. The U.S. Congress, which has been vested by the Constitution with the authority to decide when our nation goes to war, has not voted to authorize any of these military actions.
(11.7.2018) Third, Trump could simply decide to call it quits. Where Trump differs from Bush and Obama is that he never had any real enthusiasm for the Afghan campaign. He is also somewhat less vulnerable to the political costs of withdrawal because he made an opposition to prolonged nation-building missions a central plank of his campaign.
incredibly, the most widely supported effort to improve on the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) that Congress passed after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, a resolution that has been stretched past the breaking point by successive presidents, would actually legalize war in all of the places it is presently being waged and radically increase the president’s ability to legally expand the Forever War.
(4.4.2018) If you thought the „global war on terror“ was a significant overreach for a single power, just wait.
Think of it as the most momentous military planning on Earth right now.
Trump has championed American hard power and his ability to launch punitive missile strikes on enemy targets, be they militant redoubts in Afghanistan or the airfields of the Syrian regime.
Under his watch, coalition forces unleashed a relentless air campaign against the Islamic State, pulverizing the Iraqi city of Mosul and the Syrian city of Raqqa. Months later, volunteers are still digging bodies out of the rubble, while rights groups point to an untallied civilian death toll that may number in the hundreds, perhaps thousands.
(17.4.2018) the new Authorization for the Use of Military Force, introduced by Bob Corker, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman, and the Democrat Tim Kaine, may end up doing the opposite.
Senator Kaine is right that, as he said in a speech about the bill, “for too long Congress has given presidents a blank check to wage war.” The 2001 authorization, passed three days after the Sept. 11 attacks and aimed at the perpetrators of those attacks, has done just that. Three presidents in a row have warped its limited authority into an enabling act for globe-spanning presidential war.
The Corker-Kaine resolution won’t bring an end to the Forever War; it will institutionalize it.
(18.4.2018) New AUMF would cement forever war and give the phrase ‚world police‘ new meaning.
Joining others who have already made their opposition clear, Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.)—who in 2001 was the sole member of Congress to vote against the original Authorization for Use of Military Force in the wake of the the 9/11 attacks—is raising her voice once more against a bi-partisan proposal introduced this week that she says would only strengthen, not curb, the „blank check for war“ that Congress has bestowed on the president.
Saying she has „grave concerns“ about the bill introduced by Sens. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) and Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Lee on Tuesday warned it „would continue all current military operations, allow any president to unilaterally expand our wars, and effectively consent to endless war by omitting any sunset date or geographic constraints for our ongoing operations.“
Read the text of the bill—officially titled „The Authorization for Use of Military Force of 2018″—here (pdf).
(17.4.2018) The replacement AUMF would formalize a reversal of the Constitution, allowing the president to declare wars and Congress — if it dares — to veto them.
(24.8.2018) Before French President Emmanuel Macron arrived in Washington, DC for a three-day state visit last night, he granted an extensive interview to Fox News calling for long-term NATO war in Syria. As tensions between Europe and America continue to mount over Trump’s threats of trade war and of an assault against Iran, the major imperialist powers are trying to resolve their differences on the basis of an aggressive militarist program.
(12.4.2018) Panelists look at America’s longest war and examine strategies for how to bring it to an end.
(28.10.2017) The law, commonly called the A.U.M.F., on its face provided congressional authorization to use military force only against nations, groups or individuals responsible for the attacks. But while the specific enemy lawmakers were thinking about in September 2001 was the original Al Qaeda and its Taliban host in Afghanistan, three presidents of both parties have since invoked the 9/11 war authority to justify battle against Islamist militants in many other places.