Future Retirement Success
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Investing
  • Stocks
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Investing
  • Stocks

Future Retirement Success

Investing

Rand Paul’s Bill Taking a New Look at an Unlawful Mission in Syria

by December 7, 2023
December 7, 2023
Rand Paul’s Bill Taking a New Look at an Unlawful Mission in Syria

Justin Logan

Senator Rand Paul (R‑KY) has introduced a bill calling for the withdrawal of US forces from Syria unless Congress authorizes them to be there. A perverse set of events has brought this all to a head, but good constitutional hygiene and careful strategy are their own rewards. Because of Congress’s abdication, US troops in Syria have no military mission beyond serving as targets for regional militias. Our men and women in uniform deserve a clear and achievable mission, always and everywhere. They do not have one in Syria. (See my November Reason article for more on this.)

To recap: despite repeated pledges there would be “no boots on the ground” in Syria as part of the anti‐​ISIS campaign, President Obama put boots on the ground in Syria as part of the anti‐​ISIS campaign. In December 2018, President Trump noted that ISIS, having lost 99 percent of the territory it held during its vaunted caliphate, had been defeated, and pledged that there would be a “full” and “rapid” withdrawal of US forces from the country. Trump’s defense secretary and counter‐​ISIS czar (who is now President Biden’s point man on the Middle East) resigned in protest, and the officials who didn’t resign successfully worked to sabotage Trump’s decision to withdraw US forces.

Since the Israeli assault on Gaza in response to the October 7 Hamas terror attack, US forces in Syria have served as little more than shooting gallery targets for regional militias backed by Iran. Contrary to their ostensible purpose, they are not fighting ISIS. As noted in the most recent Inspector General report for the counter‐​ISIS campaign, US forces stationed at the major US base in Syria had “no kinetic engagements” with the enemy during the previous three months. Whatever rump ISIS faction exists in Syria, local incentives and capabilities exist for dealing with it. Handily.

As the former US Ambassador to Syria Robert Ford recently observed, the “real (but unstated) reason the US is there is to block Iran from using a road coming from Iraq into Syria.” But the Iranians simply take a somewhat longer route, and the cost we pay for making them do this has been regular rocket fire, the primary defense against which has been luck. This is a disservice to our servicemembers.

Congress should find the commensurate courage to debate this mission, and should they decide on war with Syria or Iran, the Constitution provides them the option of declaring war on Syria or Iran. Barring that, these troops have no lawful or coherent mission, and they should be brought home.

0
FacebookTwitterGoogle +Pinterest
previous post
Bank of England set to examine risks posed by artificial intelligence
next post
First Serious Effort in Years to Expand Access to Methadone Treatment

You may also like

Rep. Miller‐​Meeks’ OTC Act Might Nudge the FDA...

July 14, 2023

Navigating the Ma(i)ze of Mexico’s GM Corn Ban

October 22, 2023

Vivek Ramaswamy’s Conditions for Allowing Elections

August 30, 2023

Modi’s Bad Judgment in Choosing “National Champions”

November 21, 2024

Bipartisan Stirrings on the National Emergencies Act

June 5, 2024

CrowdStrike is the Latest Example of the “Brussels...

August 6, 2024

Democracies, Autocracies, and Same‐​Sex Unions

May 3, 2023

What’s New in the CFTC’s DeFi Report Is...

January 22, 2024

Legalizing Organ Sales

May 25, 2023

Friday Feature: Riverside Educational Services

May 10, 2024

    Get free access to all of the retirement secrets and income strategies from our experts! or Join The Exclusive Subscription Today And Get the Premium Articles Acess for Free

    By opting in you agree to receive emails from us and our affiliates. Your information is secure and your privacy is protected.

    Recent Posts

    • Rescissions: A Small but Welcome Step Toward Spending Discipline

      June 5, 2025
    • DAVID MARCUS: Why Navy ships should not be named for gay rights icons

      June 5, 2025
    • GREGG JARRETT: Biden, the ‘marionette president; and the case of the runaway autopen

      June 5, 2025
    • Trump Practically Bans Travel and Immigration from 12 Countries with Flimsy Security Justifications

      June 5, 2025
    • ‘He’s not a big factor’: Trump’s Senate allies dismiss Elon Musk’s calls to ‘kill the bill’

      June 5, 2025
    • Fears grow that Tata Steel could be excluded from Starmer-Trump trade deal

      June 5, 2025

    Categories

    • Business (8,147)
    • Investing (2,008)
    • Politics (15,523)
    • Stocks (3,127)
    • About us
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms & Conditions

    Disclaimer: futureretirementsuccess.com, its managers, its employees, and assigns (collectively “The Company”) do not make any guarantee or warranty about what is advertised above. Information provided by this website is for research purposes only and should not be considered as personalized financial advice. The Company is not affiliated with, nor does it receive compensation from, any specific security. The Company is not registered or licensed by any governing body in any jurisdiction to give investing advice or provide investment recommendation. Any investments recommended here should be taken into consideration only after consulting with your investment advisor and after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company.

    Copyright © 2025 futureretirementsuccess.com | All Rights Reserved