Thanks to U.S. Congress, Endless War Will... Not End
Source: common dreams from huffington post, anti-war.com,
From Common Dreams -
"An attempt to repeal the 2001 congressional authorization that provides the legal basis for the ongoing wars in both Afghanistan, Iraq, and the global war on terror was voted down by the House of Representatives on Wednesday night."
snip, and . .
". . Lee said last week that she wants to "force a debate on this war and repeal the 2001 blank check for endless war that got us into these perpetual wars."
Read more: http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/05/18/thanks-us-congress-endless-war-will-not-end
It is unbelievable that the GOP Congress refuses to discuss, debate
or vote on the wars that rage.
Would the MSM mind very much mentioning this to the American
people, and asking the candidates where they stand on it?
Jackie Wilson Said
(4,176 posts)for that which goes right.
While this is happening the Senate still refuses to do their job with the SC, a Senate which as far as I am concerned is in violation of their own constitutional duties and these senators must be removed somehow.
FairWinds
(1,717 posts)PLEASE make sure your Congress-Critter is held accountable . .
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2016/roll210.xml
I can imagine no greater dereliction of Congressional
duty to the Constitution, and their oath to it, than
PUNTING ON ONGOING WARS.
Andy823
(11,495 posts)Vote them out of office! Yes, I know some democrats are just as bad, so find replacements who will do what needs to be done and get the elected. No matter who Democrats put in the WH, we have to give them a congress that will do their job and help fix this country. Change has to happen at the local levels, then the state and on to the national scene. We can't sit on are ass during the presidential elections, or during the midterms. We need to stop listening to the right wing talking points that we should just stay home and not vote. When Democrats get out and vote, we win. Republicans know this and they send out their minions out to stir things up and spew BS talking points that they hope will keep Democrats mad enough they won't vote. We have to show them thats not going to work.
McKim
(2,412 posts)This is the main problem in the US, our disgusting wars and our bloated military budget make it impossible for our citizens to have access to the benefits they deserve and have paid for.
Besides the economic crimes of using our taxes for wars, there is the moral crime. We have over a million people dead in Iraq and 275,000 deaths with our Syria interventions. Americans are caught up in a frenzy of popular culture, infotainment, overdone holidays, festivals, drinking, drugs, and sports events that distract us from the horrible truth of what we are doing abroad.
Beneath the happy face is the moral disaster that we have become complicit in this monstrous enterprise, and the pain and guilt seep in now and then eating away at our souls. This is a sad day for America. I support Sanders who has shown us a path out of this abyss.
Igel
(35,356 posts)If you want the fighting in Afghanistan to end, Obama could stop it next week by pulling out troops.
There is no Congressional mandate to fight there. There is authorization to fight.
President: "Please, Mr. Congress, may I go to the war?"
Congress: "Yes, you may."
That's how it works.
What the Senate didn't do is go and say, "Okay, Mr. President, you've been in the war room long enough, you have to return to class. No no longer are authorized to wage war."
Even if Congress declares war, there's nothing forcing the army to go and fight. The CiC could order retreat after retreat until the entire DOD and US government has relocated to Lawrence, Kansas.
FairWinds
(1,717 posts)but also Iraq, Syria and the GWOT.
By not holding hearings or voting, Congress is shirking its duty.
You might want to read the article.
24601
(3,962 posts)has not voted to end such conflicts.
It's generally working the same way with the Authorizations to use Military Force (AUMF), which isn't the same as an all-out declaration of war. There are myriad statutes that apply only during declared war that are not in effect.
But in terms of ending it - Igel is precisely correct in that the President could completely disengage tomorrow. There is nothing forcing the fighting and it's a choice the President makes with every strike. But disengaging before establishing stability creates the vacuum that gets filled by extremists. There's no education in the 2nd kick from a mule.
FairWinds
(1,717 posts)Congress has a duty to act.
But yes, Obama can disengage if he wants.
Isn't it way past time to have a national debate on the
Forever War?
Isn't most (almost all?) of the violence the result of earlier
US interventions - esp 2003?
How has US use of force contributed to "establishing stability"?
Veterans For Peace
forest444
(5,902 posts)Inflicting a "new Pearl Harbor" buys you about 20 years of voter acquiescence for perpetual war - plus another 10 years or so with the right mass media manipulation.
It's always been like this.
Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)Lost my vote now.
FairWinds
(1,717 posts)Pretty sure you are off on this one.
An "aye" vote is to REPEAL the Iraq War resolution, which to me folks who
have some respect for the constitution should want.
I am as usual with Barbara Lee on this one.
Veterans For Peace