Bill Nelson seeks new authority for president against Islamic State [ boots in Syria ]


#1

U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL), a strong advocate for attacking the Sunni extremist group Islamic State (IS) in Syria, today introduced a joint resolution giving the President authority to use force against the group in Syria, including commandos on the ground if needed.

President Barack Obama is scheduled to deliver a speech Wednesday laying out his strategy for dealing with IS. Obama has maintained that he does not need Congressional authority to act, and that he is not calling for troops on the ground in Syria.

Nelson, a senior member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said while he believes the President has the authority to act on his own, “there are some who disagree, so rather than quibble about legalities, I have filed this legislation.”

Nelson’s resolution has a three-year limit on actions, but offers flexibility to insert limited U.S. troops on the ground, if needed.

American boots have already been on the ground in Syria with the rescue attempt of journalists James Foley and Steven Sotloff, who were later beheaded by IS, said Nelson, pointing out that Sotloff was a Florida native.

tbo.com/news/politics/bill-nelson-seeks-new-authority-for-president-against-islamic-state-20140908/

Note this legislation would authorize Special Forces to be on the ground but not large army divisions ‘rotational forces.’

Attached is a copy of Nelson’s legislation:

S. J. RES. ______

To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against the Islamic

State in Iraq and the Levant.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

Mr. NELSON introduced the following joint resolution; which was read twice

and referred to the Committee on ________________

JOINT RESOLUTION

To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against

the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This joint resolution may be cited as the ‘‘Authoriza

5 tion for Use of Military Force against the Islamic State

6 in Iraq and the Levant’’.

1 SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES

2 ARMED FORCES AGAINST THE ISLAMIC

3 STATE IN IRAQ AND THE LEVANT.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—That the President is authorized

5 to use appropriate force against the Islamic State in Iraq

6 and the Levant (ISIL) in order to prevent terrorist attacks

7 on the people and interests of the United States and our

8 allies.

9 (b) NO AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF ROTATIONAL

10 GROUND FORCES.—The authorization in this section does

11 not include authorization for the use of rotational ground

12 forces.

13 © EXPIRATION.—The authorization in this section

14 shall expire on the date that is three years after the date

15 of the enactment of this joint resolution.

16 (d) WAR POWERS RESOLUTION REQUIREMENTS.—

17 (1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION.—

18 Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers

19 Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is

20 intended to constitute specific statutory authoriza

21 tion within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War

22 Powers Resolution.

23 (2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIRE

24 MENTS.—Nothing in this resolution supercedes any

25 requirement of the War Powers Resolution.

billnelson.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/congress-faced-with-decision-on-airstrikes-in-syria


#2

Although I strongly oppose this part of it:

9 (b) NO AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF ROTATIONAL

10 GROUND FORCES.—The authorization in this section does

11 not include authorization for the use of rotational ground

12 forces.

I voted “yes”.

It seems to me if we’re going to war against ISIS, we need to mean it, whatever it takes, and to insert this bit seems to be a sop to those, primarily Dems, who made such a big deal out of withdrawing troops from Iraq.

I’ll add that I do NOT trust Obama at all, and among those ways in which I don’t trust him, I do not trust him not to make America a de facto mercenary of Iran. I greatly fear that’s what he intends.

Presumably congress can pass a counter-resolution if that’s what he does, or at least one hopes so.


#3

I know too many of our service men and woman who are war weary with multiple deployments abroad and I do not wish do condemn them to more of the same. I say send in missile armed drones and be gone with the threat, but leave our soldiers here.


#4

Horrible idea. Sergey Lavrov has already warned that the US could use this as a pretext to attack Syrian government forces.

                                           It's a pretty scary scenario, US forces aid the FSA, and when the Syrian government justifiably fires upon them, Obama can order airstrikes against the Syrian government.

#5

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.