Doesn't Obama sending ISIS related AUMF to Congress contradict all those bad things people like me have been saying about his practice of foreign policy? We'll see how it plays out, but I'd say no - so far to me looks like yet another political ploy on his part - he's trying to get Republicans to sign off on his limited approach, thinking that will shut them up - if they don't sign off on it, then he gets to blame them for whatever failures that follow - it's a political ploy, far as I can tell - not dissimilar from his Afghan surge, which had much more to do with politics than it had to do with winning the war. The AUMF has a time limit and stipulates no offensive ground forces aside from special ops - that essentially amounts to the status quo and won't get the job done without the deployment of a rather large and mobile Arab/Turkish/Kurdish army under American command - don't see that happening, but even if it does it raises more questions than it answers - how competent and committed would this army be? Would it really be up to the task of urban warfare? Are they really gonna send troops into Syria, and if they do, would it be to topple or prop up Assad? Can't see a Sunni army looking to prop up Assad, so... what then? Will the al-Nursa Front also be on the target list? What about Iran? They may want to get rid of ISIS too but at the expense of the Saudis becoming a regional power in Syria and Sunni Iraq? That's a big no. But let's allow for possibility this works and you 'win' the war - without American troops how do you stabilize what you've won? If Mosul turns into another Fallujah, not only do I not believe this putative Arab army would be up to fighting such a war - but even if they pull it off who occupies the city and surrounding territory afterwards in order to secure the victory?
Nope, this has political ploy written all over it - especially since we've seen this kind of cynical politicking from Obama before - he's free to prove me wrong, but my guess is once the dust settles it will look like another reiteration of leading from behind and nothing much changes - except that Obama will now have two more things he can blame stuff on - the GOP if they don't sign off on the AUMF - and the Sunni Arab states if they refuse to send troops in or if they do and perform horribly.
[John Yoo in a nice article points to another aspect of the AUMF that seems to confirm that it's all about cynical political ploys - if Republicans agree to the 'sunset clause' of a three year deadline on the authorization they'll basically be setting a precedent that undermines the war making powers of the executive branch, something the Democrats will surely throw in their face next time a Republican president goes to war. The AUMF is nothing more than a devious bit of politicking and I agree with Yoo, the Congress should just ignore it - if Obama truly wants to take the fight to ISIS he already has all the power he needs to do that - but of course any objective observer realizes Obama has no serious intent when it comes to ISIS, so no point allowing yourself to become the object of yet another partisan political stunt by Obama - of course Obama will then blame Republicans for the failures to come, at which point you just have to forcefully reiterate that if he's serious about about confronting the threat he should send Congress an AUMF that reflects that seriousness]
Nope, this has political ploy written all over it - especially since we've seen this kind of cynical politicking from Obama before - he's free to prove me wrong, but my guess is once the dust settles it will look like another reiteration of leading from behind and nothing much changes - except that Obama will now have two more things he can blame stuff on - the GOP if they don't sign off on the AUMF - and the Sunni Arab states if they refuse to send troops in or if they do and perform horribly.
[John Yoo in a nice article points to another aspect of the AUMF that seems to confirm that it's all about cynical political ploys - if Republicans agree to the 'sunset clause' of a three year deadline on the authorization they'll basically be setting a precedent that undermines the war making powers of the executive branch, something the Democrats will surely throw in their face next time a Republican president goes to war. The AUMF is nothing more than a devious bit of politicking and I agree with Yoo, the Congress should just ignore it - if Obama truly wants to take the fight to ISIS he already has all the power he needs to do that - but of course any objective observer realizes Obama has no serious intent when it comes to ISIS, so no point allowing yourself to become the object of yet another partisan political stunt by Obama - of course Obama will then blame Republicans for the failures to come, at which point you just have to forcefully reiterate that if he's serious about about confronting the threat he should send Congress an AUMF that reflects that seriousness]
