Here is the Whitehouse's proposed Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF):
(a) Authorization. — The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate
in connection with the use of chemical weapons or other weapons of mass destruction in the conflict in Syria in order to –
(1) prevent or deter the use or proliferation (including the transfer to terrorist groups or other state or non-state actors), within, to or from
Syria, of any weapons of mass destruction, including chemical or biological weapons or components of or materials used in such weapons; or
(2) protect the United States and its allies and partners against the threat posed by such weapons.
(This can also be found in the link below)
As Senator Leahy and other members of Congress have already said, it is too broad. It is essentially a redux of the carte blanch that Congress gave
to Bush to deal with Iraq.
Here is a portion of an analysis of just how broad this proposed AUMF is:
Lawfare - The Administration’s Proposed Syria AUMF Is
There is much more here than at first meets the eye. The proposed AUMF focuses on Syrian WMD but is otherwise very broad. It authorizes the
President to use any element of the U.S. Armed Forces and any method of force. It does not contain specific limits on targets – either in terms of
the identity of the targets (e.g. the Syrian government, Syrian rebels, Hezbollah, Iran) or the geography of the targets. Its main limit comes on the
purposes for which force can be used. Four points are worth making about these purposes. First, the proposed AUMF authorizes the President to use
force “in connection with” the use of WMD in the Syrian civil war. (It does not limit the President’s use force to the territory of Syria, but
rather says that the use of force must have a connection to the use of WMD in the Syrian conflict. Activities outside Syria can and certainly do have
a connection to the use of WMD in the Syrian civil war.). Second, the use of force must be designed to “prevent or deter the use or
proliferation” of WMDs “within, to or from Syria” or (broader yet) to “protect the United States and its allies and partners against the
threat posed by such weapons.” Third, the proposed AUMF gives the President final interpretive authority to determine when these criteria are
satisfied (“as he determines to be necessary and appropriate”). Fourth, the proposed AUMF contemplates no procedural restrictions on the
President’s powers (such as a time limit).
I recommend you check out the link and see the rest this person has to say on it. Here are a few of my thoughts on the matter, some o which coincide
with the author of this piece.
With the authority this AUMF would provide, the president could choose to take up sides in the Syrian civil war and even attempt regime change
because, after all, it is related to Syrian chemical weapon use. Note how the AUMF doesn't even say the Syrian government is responsible for these
chemical weapons attacks; Obama could use the twisted logic that even if the rebels are using the chemical weapons, overthrowing the Assad regime
would lead to the end of the use of chemical weapons.
Then there is the aspect of the AUMF discussing keeping chemical weapons from leaving or coming into Syria and keeping them from terrorists. What
would then stop the US from attacking all shipments of anything in or out of Syria under the pretext that they were convoys of chemical weapons?
What would stop the US from attacking Hezbollah or Hamas, claiming that these were pre-emptive strikes to keep terrorists from getting the Syrian
Perhaps he worst aspect of this is that there is no geographical delineation of the zone of conflict. Since Russia and Iran are supporting Syria,
could the US then say that attacks on these two countries are fair game because they are supporting a country supposedly using chemical weapons?
Another very important item is not mentioned in the AUMF, and that is whether US ground forces could also be involved. Given that the AUMF says the
President can use US military force as he sees fit, it is implied that he could send ground troops in.
This is an incredibly expansive set of powers Obama wants. No way should Congress give him this blank check to wage war on Syria as it fool-heartedly
gave Bush to deal with Iraq. This AUMF needs to be circumscribed. It's gobsmacking that this is what the president has presented Congress with. As
the good lady in the video of this thread says:
edit on 2-9-2013 by MrInquisitive because: (no reason given)
edit on Mon Sep 2 2013 by DontTreadOnMe because: 15e.) Recruitment/Solicitation:i) You will not use your membership in the Websites for any
type of recruitment to any causes whatsoever. You will not Post. use the chat feature, use videos, or use the private message system to disseminate
advertisements, chain letters, petitions, pyramid schemes, or any kind of solicitation for political action, social action, letter campaigns, or
related online and/or offline coordinated actions of any kind.