Senate Punts on Iran War Powers as Ground War Grows More Likely
Lawmakers are refusing to acknowledge what is increasingly looking like a big, long war.
On February 24, 2022, the Russian government announced the beginning of a "special military operation" in Ukraine. Russian propagandists—as well as the CIA—predicted that Ukraine wouldn't last more than a few days. Four years later, the Ukrainian military is carrying out mass air raids inside Russian territory.
A few days after the fourth anniversary of that war, U.S. President Donald Trump announced the beginning of a surprise "major military operation" to bring "freedom" to the people of Iran. He and his advisors insisted that the war would be over quickly, maybe within a few weeks. Now, five days into the war, U.S. Central Command is reportedly preparing for combat that will last at least 100 days and perhaps until September.
But members of Congress are still insisting that the war is not a war. On Wednesday night, the Senate voted down a war powers resolution that would restrain the president. Republicans incoherently insisted that the United States is not at war and has already been at war with Iran. Some Democratic opponents of the war, meanwhile, have indicated that they will still vote to fund it.
"We're not at war right now. We're four days into a very specific, clear mission," Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R–La.) said at a press conference before the vote.
"We're at war with Iran. We've been at war for a long…they've been at war with us. We're finally at war with them. It's an undeclared state of war," Sen. Lindsey Graham (R–S.C.) told reporters in the hallway of the Senate.
Sen. Todd Young (R–In.) had initially opposed invoking the War Powers resolution over Venezuela earlier this year because there wasn't any war yet and the administration promised to ask for permission "in advance for an authorization of force." On Wednesday, he voted against the war powers resolution for the opposite reason: There's already a war and it's too late for an "abrupt disengagement."
The Department of War is expected to ask Congress for $50 billion in extra funding to continue the war. While some Democrats say that they will not fund the war—Sen. Ruben Gallego (D–Az.) wrote on social media that "countries of the Middle East need to pick up the tab" instead of American taxpayers—other Democratic senators aren't ruling it out. "I mean, we're in it," Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D–Mich.) told Politico.
Meanwhile, the Trump administration has pointedly refused to rule out putting "boots on the ground." American sources and a Middle Eastern official told Middle East Eye, a magazine based in London, that Secretary of War Pete Hegseth is pushing for ground troop deployments in Iran, something Secretary of State Marco Rubio is pushing back against.
U.S. ground troops have already clashed with the Iraqi army while carrying out an unknown operation in the desert. And U.S. covert operators are training exiles in Iraqi Kurdistan to attack Iran and create a "buffer zone" within the country, CNN and Al Monitor report. The administration told Fox News, Axios, and The Jerusalem Post on Wednesday night that the Kurdish offensive had already begun, only for Kurdish leaders and journalists on the ground to deny it was happening.
Although U.S. and Israeli officials insist that their air patrols have been able to suppress Iranian missile fire by hunting down launchers, they haven't been able to stop Iran's attack drones, which have killed at least six U.S. troop members in Kuwait and shut down oil shipping throughout the region. Arab states that host U.S. troops are complaining that they're running dangerously low on air defense ammunition, CBS reports.
Trump's goals for the war may go beyond what airpower alone can do. The President told Axios on Thursday that he needs to be personally involved in picking Iran's next leader.
Axios also reports that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who pushed Trump to start the war, was asking the White House for assurances that the U.S. wasn't negotiating for peace with Iran after Israeli spies caught wind of secret talks.
"Once war begins and American soldiers are under fire, a rational discussion of the pros and cons of war becomes nearly impossible. That is exactly why our Founders wrote a Constitution that demands a debate before the initiation of war," Sen. Rand Paul (R–Ky.), sponsor of the war powers resolution, wrote in an essay published by Fox News.
"And because there was no national discussion about going to war, we do not know whether ground troops will be used. We have no idea how long the war will last. We have no idea who will lead Iran after the death of the supreme leader. And we have no idea how many casualties the American people are supposed to tolerate," he continued.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please to post comments
Meanwhile, the Trump administration has pointedly refused to rule out putting "boots on the ground."
Are Americans ok with the military blowing up “Narco Trafficers”? Check
Are Americans ok with the military launching an attack on Venezuela and installing a “new” regime? Check
Are Americans ok with teaming up with Israel and launching a military assault on Iran? Check
Are Americans ok with US subs blowing up Iranian frigates with torpedoes? Check
What the fuck do you think is next?
What the fuck do you think is next?
You tell us.
I’d say it’s pretty clear what’s coming next.
Maybe the correct question is:
“What comes after boots on the ground”?
>>Lawmakers are refusing to acknowledge what is increasingly looking like a big, long war.
possible they disagree with your assessment
How can you possibly think 100 senators with high level access are more capable than one Reason flunky?
Its already a forever war. Just ask a journalist.
Exactly like Venezuela was.
Journalists are never wrong.
Meanwhile the mullahs are dead. IGRC leadership is dead. Iranian boats are becoming forever reefs.
Its already a forever war.
Pointing to Ukraine, in the Biden Administration, as an opener and starting in 2022 rather than with Victoria Nuland or the Invasion of Crimea during the Obama Administration was nuts. Even pretty rabidly pro-Ukrainian people would recognize it as pretty blatantly dishonest.
"Israel and Palestine have been at each other's throats since at least WWII, just imagine how long invasion of Grenada could('ve) go(ne) on!"
I have a lot of respect for Rand Paul but let's assume for a minute that the Congress voted 70% to end this war immediately. As a practical matter it would be impossible to accomplish and would probably end in a bloodbath. The law as written gives the executive pretty much full authority for at least 60 days. I'm all for standing up for principles but at this point it's just posturing.
Question; whose blood bath?
Comment; There are others in the battle, and the US legislature has no control over them. The "conflict" would continue.
A really mean president would "leave" by landing all the planes in Israel, and abandoning ships as Israeli patrol boats approached.
That's the problem with kinetic action. Once you get started it's hard to stop.
Not really. The US could stop bombing at anytime.
We know how to leave disasters after 20 years. Why wait?
The US could stop the war at anytime and return to a defensive posture.
If Iran wasn't a threat why would they need to be in a defensive posture?
I could stand in the Middle of the East and start an Israel First war and kill six American soldiers on the first day - and I wouldn't lose a single voter.
Jewfree has thoughts.
He’s pissed off the jooz are winning.
On February 24, 2022, the Russian government announced the beginning of a "special military operation" in Ukraine. Russian propagandists—as well as the CIA—predicted that Ukraine wouldn't last more than a few days. Four years later, the Ukrainian military is carrying out mass air raids inside Russian territory
What an odd way for a libertarian magazine to call for non-interventionism *and* cover for ongoing military attacks on civilian infrastructure in foreign territory.
Almost like they don't actually want peace or non-intervention, they just want
the right peopletheir people to win any given conflict and then declare all opposition invalid.Note: Judge Dariusz Lubowski said as he announced his ruling that the attack on the pipelines should be understood as a military action in a "just war," and therefore not subject to criminal responsibility on the part of an individual. He also questioned German jurisdiction for various reasons, including the fact that the explosions occurred in international waters.
The same Russian propagandists that reported alongside the same CIA now say, CIA knew about Kiev plot to blow up Nord Stream – Der Spiegel