Obama Can’t Decide What Kind of War Authorization He Wants

1-The-King-Barack-Obama-And-His-Jester-78130

Even by the standards of Obama Inc, its approach to the Authorization for the Use of Military Force and ISIS has been completely incoherent.

At one point his people actually asked Congress to kill the Iraq War AUMF and then later suggested that they were relying on it. Obama has refused to offer an AUMF even though he could get a virtual blank check for anything he would put in there.

Kerry has told the Senate what Obama doesn’t want in an AUMF, which appears to be anything specific whatsoever, and would just rather keep on fighting it based on whatever.

Kerry could have legitimately argued that the fight against ISIS is covered by the 9/11 AUMF, but he chose not do that either.

The whole mess is another reminder that…

A. Obama refuses to accept any level of Congressional oversight or limits to his authority

B. Obama is also incapable of making up his mind about a war leading to a constant state of indecisiveness

This is a problem because not only do you have someone who wants absolute authority, but you have someone too indecisive to know what he wants on any issues that he isn’t politically comfortable with.

Then add on that…

1. His White House staffers are inexperienced and incompetent when it comes to practical governance.

2. Wars are really run through his cronies who fight out the agenda among themselves

3. Neither Obama nor his people care about the law

So we end up with banana republic stuff. This is how Napoleon III or Fidel Castro did things.

Obama can’t decide what to do. He also doesn’t want input from anyone outside his charmed circle as to what to do. And he isn’t interested in talking to Congress about what he wants to do.

So there is no AUMF. If Congress takes the lead, he’ll just ignore it and his people will tell the media that Congress is obstructing the war against ISIS, not because it’s true, but because he’s a liar who tells the same lies whenever it comes to protecting his power.

Obama didn’t want to bomb ISIS. He’s stuck doing what he doesn’t want to do. The execution is poor and the professionals are being hampered by a guy who doesn’t know what he’s doing when it comes to this, but knows that he doesn’t want to work with anyone else.

  • glpage

    Various people have said the upcoming Republican control of the House and Senate should not attempt to impeach Obama. Apparently, they feel it could cost the Republican party too much politically. I don’t think I agree with that. It certainly will cause all sorts of political fallout for quite a while but not impeaching him will indicate that Congress will never do anything to an unlawful, out of control imperial President. Unless, of course, the President is Republican and Congress is controlled by Democrats; the Dems will gladly impeach a Republican who exceeds the law as Obama has.

    • Bamaguje

      I agree that Obama should be impeached even though I expect Ferguson type riots of Blacks across America.
      The sooner Republicans do it, the better. So that Biden can be allowed to mess up.
      If impeachment is too close to the 2016 election, Democrats may reap sympathy votes.

      • Matthew Johnston

        We cut a deal with Obama in 2008 about charges we had the Democrats wanting to empeach Bush and Cheney and shutdown the CITY. Obama was going to have to follow a lot of Bush era policies as that is all that works and are all illegal be it the targeted killings, renditions and NSA surveillance. So each incoming President would have to pardon the out going one Obama to Bush and Bush or Clinton to Obama. Criminalizing the office. So Obama kept his part of the gentleman’s agreement and we will keep ours.

  • Daniel

    The military should reject Obama’s order as illegal and not go.
    That unit that was sent into the Ebola zone should have refused to go. Generals should resign in protest. The she-males of the GOP should provide them cover.
    It’s time for RESISTANCE.
    But I understand that it’s time for our civilization to go.(Although I don’t plan on going peacefully).
    We’re doomed the same way the Romans were by their perverted and corrupt leaders.

  • cajunwarthog

    Shades of Hilter. remenber Hilter wanted and got complete control of the military and police. Since Hilter, like obama was not a military strategist or leader,,, thousands of German soldiers died needlessly, sort of like our boys dying with the idiotic ROEs they are forced to adhere to.

    Of course, our “elected” will fold and give obama what he wants.
    Who should be “rioting” now?

  • cree

    The picture included says it all. Because Obama is the man, he has to try and act the part; his merit is lacking (they really should have waited on that peace prize).

    From documentaries, books and news of other places, we got factual basis to see dictator’s results. Now, besides other places, we get one all our own. You just can’t beat first hand experience.

  • halevi

    Obama can’t find his a– with one hand.

  • Matthew Johnston

    The region is fickle as are allies. So my opinion was don’t put your hand up because you will be deserted and left carrying the can. This is what happened to Turkey and what happened to Obama. No for Israel it would have been very bad and used to spin propaganda against Israel and away from Assad. Jews have a history of being used as diversion and scapegoats. So Obama option bomb Assad on day one heavy and hard regardless of Russian threats of nuclear war. Arm the FSA or subcontract it out regional powers who are going to send arms regardless all the US could was limit the shipments to small arms. Backing down to remove the WMD one no one expected Assad to be honest he is know as a pathological liar or another reason will present to strike.