XPost: ba.politics, dc.media, soc.penpals   
   XPost: alt.burningman   
   From: failure@öbama.com   
      
   The New York Times first reported Friday that Obama   
   administration officials believe that the 2002 law which   
   authorized the war “would serve as an alternative statutory   
   authority basis on which the President may rely for military   
   action in Iraq.” The news comes just months after National   
   Security Advisor Susan Rice said the Authorization for Use of   
   Military Force (AUMF) was no longer operative.   
      
   “With American combat troops having completed their withdrawal   
   from Iraq on December 18, 2001, the Iraq AUMF is no longer used   
   for any U.S. government activities and the Administration fully   
   supports its repeal,” Rice wrote to Speaker of the House John   
   Boehner in July.   
      
   During the 2008 Democratic presidential primary, Obama   
   eviscerated then-Sen. Hillary Clinton for her vote in favor of   
   the 2002 Iraq War resolution, and in the general election, drew   
   sharp contrast with Sen. John McCain over how to bring the war   
   to an end.   
      
   A senior administration official says the White House still   
   supports repealing the 2002 law, and fully believes it can use   
   the 2001 AUMF, passed after the attacks of September 11, 2001 to   
   allow the U.S. to strike al Qaeda, to justify the strikes   
   against ISIS in Iraq and Syria. But the 2002 law would provide   
   additional legal underpinning to strikes in Iraq—and even   
   Syria—as scholars question the applicability of the 2001   
   authorization to ISIS, which publicly broke with al Qaeda in   
   Iraq.   
      
   “We believe that the President would have the statutory   
   authority to conduct airstrikes against [ISIS] in Syria under   
   the 2002 AUMF in at least some circumstances,” the official said.   
      
   For the opening stages of the American air campaign, the 160-   
   strike effort largely restricted to humanitarian missions, and   
   protecting American personnel and facilities, Obama relied on   
   his Constitutional authority to protect the American people.   
   Hours before Obama announced a broader campaign to “degrade and   
   ultimately destroy” the Islamist militant group Wednesday,   
   officials revealed that Obama would rely on the 2001 AUMF, which   
   the administration had said previously it hopes to reign in.   
      
   In a statement, the senior administration official explained how   
   the White House applies the 2001 law to ISIS:   
      
   The 2001 AUMF authorizes the use of “all necessary and   
   appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or   
   persons” responsible for 9/11 and those who “harbored such   
   organizations or persons.” The Administration has interpreted   
   the 2001 AUMF to authorize the use of force against AQ, the   
   Taliban, and associated forces. Based on ISIL’s longstanding   
   relationship with al-Qa’ida (AQ) and Usama bin Laden; its long   
   history of conducting, and continued desire to conduct, attacks   
   against U.S. persons and interests, the extensive history of   
   U.S. combat operations against ISIL dating back to the time the   
   group first affiliated with AQ in 2004; and ISIL’s position –   
   supported by some individual members and factions of AQ-aligned   
   groups – that it is the true inheritor of Usama bin Laden’s   
   legacy, the President may rely on the 2001 AUMF as statutory   
   authority for the use of force against ISIL, notwithstanding the   
   recent public split between AQ’s senior leadership and ISIL.   
      
   http://time.com/3362683/obama-isis-iraq-syria-war-aumf/   
      
       
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)