We Had a Shooting Involving Federal Immigration Officers in Portland. Tren de Aragua...
Can JD Vance Be Present for Every White House Press Briefing? He Masterful...
DOGE Just Updated Its Website. Here's How Much It's Saved.
Kicking Off the Year With Press Derangement, Contradictions, and Slanted Approaches to Sob...
Rep. Emily Randall Knows Who Congress Should Really Target for Fraud, and It's...
America First Lawmakers Must Punch Back As Europe Forces Importation of Harmful Regulation...
Is America's Iraq Syndrome Over?
You Won't Believe What this Socialist CA Mayor Said About the Bondi Beach...
JD Vance Predicts a Rough Road for Democrats in 2028
Minneapolis Public Schools Reportedly Offering Remote Learning Through Feb. 12 After ICE S...
DOJ Sues Two California Cities Over Natural Gas Ban in New Construction
Labtech to Pay $6.8M, Plead Guilty to Anti-Kickback Violations
U.S. House Approves Obamacare Subsidy Extension as Some Republicans Break With Party
Cincinnati Case Unseals Alleged $27M Drug Money Laundering Operation
Marriott Employee Fired After Allegedly Doxxing ICE Agents on Social Media
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

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement