Make America the 1990s Again
Salem Radio Network Now Has a One-Two Punch Against Liberal America in the...
White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles Felt 'Blindsided' by Vanity Fair Article
Yes, Progressives Really Did This on the Anniversary of the Boston Tea Party
Who Is Mustapha Kourbach? And Why Is Brown University Scrubbing His Entire Existence...
What John Fetterman Said to Chris Cuomo Is Going to Trigger Another Dem...
Marjorie Taylor Greene Says the 'Dam Is Breaking' on Trump's Hold on the...
Report: This Trump Administration Official Could Be Stepping Down Soon
Patriots Rally Around Target Employee Harassed by Leftist Karen
'Avner's Is Closed': Jewish Bagel Shop Shutters Doors Thanks to Ongoing Threats, Antisemit...
Keir Starmer Says Violence Against Women and Girls a 'National Emergency' (Guess What...
When Process Fails Justice
Jack Smith Arrives on Capitol Hill to Face Closed-Door Grilling on Trump Prosecutions
Meet the Hero Cop Who Single-Handedly Killed the Bondi Beach Terrorists
Paris Cancels Its World Famous New Years Eve Celebration Amid Security Concerns
Tipsheet

Homeland Security Committee Chairman: AUMF Not Good Enough

This morning, House Homeland Security Committee Chair Michael McCaul (R-TX) criticized President Obama’s Authorization for Use of Military Force proposed to Congress saying that the authorization, “ties our hands and specifically ties the hands of the generals.”

Advertisement

The president’s proposal, sent to Congress Wednesday, bans the use of “enduring offensive ground combat.”

“I would rather have no AUMF than the AUMF that he’s proposed,” McCaul said.

“While we would prefer not to deploy american ground troops into combat, we cannot rule out the possibility if we want to destroy ISIS,” he added.

Congressional Democrats have voiced their opposition to the policy because it does not rule out American boots on the ground. Many Republicans oppose the proposal because it does not specifically provide for ground forces.

“I would support an AUMF that would authorize a defeat and destruction of ISIS and its associates wherever they exist,” McCaul explained, adding that he doubts that the president would support such a proposal. “But I’m not going to support an AUMF that ties the hands of our generals once again, or that micromanages this conflict and weakens our ability to defeat ISIS, which is precisely what this AUMF does.”

McCaul outlined the threat of Islamic extremism abroad and within the United States, explaining that war against Islamic terror is not just a battle against a particular group, but against a growing “spiderweb” of extremism around the world.

Advertisement

“Right now, violent extremists appear to be winning,” he said.

While McCaul appreciates the president’s consulting Congress on war power, he iterated concern that agreement between Congress and the White House will be difficult.

“We must take the fight to the enemy. We must go on the offensive,” McCaul said Thursday morning. “Air strikes have not dislodged them from their territory. We need a ground force to eradicate this cancer.”

McCaul described war against ISIS as the defining conflict of the current generation’s struggle opposing Islamic extremism.

“We face an enemy whose ultimate goal is to conquer territory and impose its rule through mass fear, intimidation, rape, crucifixion and murder,” McCaul said. “We have seen the images of child soldiers and brutal beheadings and beatings. I believe we must rally the world to decisively eliminate the threat imposed by Islamist terrorism.”

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos