Obama calls on Congress to pass a war authorization against ISIS in his State of the Union speech last night. Wasn’t it the Obama administration who said they didn’t need Congress’ authorization for a war against the Islamic State? Is this really a wartime legal discussion or a White House attempt to divert attention away criticism that his existing air strikes in Iraq and Syria are not gaining the desired results?
While Obama calls on Congress for ISIS war authorization, he also wanted to remind the American public that the United States has learned from past mistakes in the wars launched after 9/11 and not get dragged into a ground war with the Islamic State terrorists. Instead, the White House plans on wiping out our country’s terrorist threats abroad by continuing its policy of working with coalitions and backing local forces to carry out the fight on the ground.
[tweetthis]#Obama tries to force #Republican hand by calling for #ISIS war authorization. #StateOfTheUnion[/tweetthis]
This is the policy used in Afghanistan that Obama mentioned in his State of the Union speech. “Instead of Americans patrolling the valleys of Afghanistan, we’ve trained their security forces, who’ve now taken the lead, and we’ve honored our troops’ sacrifice by supporting that country’s first democratic transition,” he said.
Obama Calls on Congress for War Authorization a Calculated Plan?
Why did Obama wait until after midterm elections when the Republicans won control of the Senate and expanded their majority in the House to call on Congress for war authorization? Up until now, the White House has been defiant in their stance that they had legal authority to take military action against the Islamic State under legislation dating back to 9/11.
Leading up to the 2015 State of the Union speech, Congress has stayed out of everyone’s way regarding how the war should be waged. They have also approved billions of dollars towards the air strikes in Syria and Iraq along with the funds spent on training Syrian rebels and weapons for Kurdish forces.
There have, however, been many reports about how the White House and U.S. military have been at odds on the ISIS strategy and how the Obama administration has managed the war on the Islamic State.
So, with criticism coming from Congress, military leaders and the American public over Obama’s ISIS war strategy and with others saying existing air strikes in Iraq and Syria lack the necessary legally underpinning, was this part of his State of the Union speech a way to admit there needs to be a legal authorization for war and an open door for changes in strategy?
Or. was Obama’s calling out of the Republican majority Congress a way to divert attention and make Republican lawmakers come out in support of the President’s war on ISIS – a way to force the Republican majority’s hand?
That was the message many received when Obama calls on Congress for war authorization against the Islamic State last evening.