Sen. Rand Paul’s effort to repeal the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force was easily rejected by the war-mongers in the Senate.

The resolution was first passed in 2001 so President George W. Bush could launch the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq. The AUMF has been used by Presidents Obama and Trump and is currently used to justify the U.S. occupation of Syria and troop placement in Iraq and Somalia.

“Today, I offered the US Senate a chance to repeal the 9/11 2001 authorization for war and shown our respect for the constitution, are fealty to the rule of law, and our sincere desire that peace, not perpetual war, will be our legacy,” Paul said in a statement 

Congress has used the AUMF instead of a declaration of war 11 times, according to Military.com. 

The authorization remains in effect and “gives the president the authority to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons.”

The report, citing the Congressional Research Service, noted that the AUMF can be used by the president to “prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.”

Concerned Veterans for America tweeted out that it is not uncommon for Congress to authorize military force without a declaration of war.

“AUMF requests have become more broad and vague over time, and set a precedent that the executive branch can deploy American troops without the consent of Congress,” the group said. “It’s time to repeal outdated vague AUMFs.”

Sen. Ben Cardin, D-Md., also noted that the authorization has been used by four presidents to authorize military action in countries “we never could have imagined 22 years ago—and against terror groups that didn’t exist in 2001. That was not the intent of Congress.”

Congress has not declared war since 1942.

TRENDPOST: There’s only one truly bipartisan issue in Washington and that is war. Last month, we reported on how The House of Representatives voted in opposition to a bill that would call for the immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops stationed in Syria’s oil-rich region under the guise of fighting ISIS. (See “WARMONGERS IN CONGRESS VOTE TO KEEP U.S. FORCES IN SYRIA’S FOREVER WAR,” 14 Mar 2023.)

Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., told Politico that voters are tired of wars that “don’t have any justification or basis.”

“The Iraq thing, that was not justifiable … And that’s hard for my party to admit. Because they pushed it, they carried the water for it,” he said.

PUBLISHER’S NOTE: As Gerald Celente has been stating since America’s illegal invasion of Iraq, based on lies that Saddam Hussain had weapons of mass destruction, “Do you think America would invade if Iraq’s major export was broccoli?” The same with Syria and Libya… it’s all about oil and U.S. domination. 

The United States has no right to be in Syria, a foreign nation that is no threat and has made no threats to America. 

It also should be noted the initial reason given for U.S. military presence in Syria was not fighting ISIS, but rather President Barack Obama, The Nobel Peace Prize winner, demanded that its president, Bashar al-Assad, had to go.

Yet, the American media and the public join against Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, while they champion Washington’s foreign entanglements.