“It is unfortunate that one senator chose to block consideration of a bill our nation needs right now,” McCain continued.

The Stain says this only a day after he alone blocked any chance at repealing 0bamaCare (for which he voted regularly back when 0bama was in office).

Can't the Stain just die already?

On the substance, Rand is right. They are still using the old AUFs from the Bush era after 9/11, just like 0bama did when he used those 9/11 AUFs to wade into the final destruction of Libya as a functioning nation.

The Stain would probably just prefer that we have have a permanent declared war on Planet Earth. That is his fundamental position. And he's such a whiny bitch when anyone points it out.

“This legislation is more vital than ever. Global terrorist networks, increasing great power competition with Russia and China"

McCain wants war with Russia and China without authorisation by Congress. This will be his legacy.

The Stain says this only a day after he alone blocked any chance at repealing 0bamaCare (for which he voted regularly back when 0bama was in office).

Words fail me.

Stain is very afraid that his efforts to turn this civil war in Syria into WW III are in jeopardy.

In the end, Rand will probably introduce his defense bill amendments and they'll get voted down again. However, we can still hope that McStain will have a stroke and die on the Senate floor as his own personal final filibuster.

"Paul has consistently stated that the congressional authority of war must be restored ..."

Hah! Congress is petrified that voters might hold them accountable for anything they vote on, with "going to war" being their least favorite action.

" McStain will have a stroke and die on the Senate floor as his own personal final filibuster. "

More likely, have a stroke while he & Graham are in the sack. Only question, is who will be on top, and who on bottom, LOL !!!

However, we can still hope that McStain will have a stroke and die on the Senate floor as his own personal final filibuster.

I'm guessing that's the real reason Rand offered the amendments.

More likely, have a stroke while he & Graham are in the sack. Only question, is who will be on top, and who on bottom

Thanks for the repulsive, nausea-inducing image pal.

Excuse me, I need to go throw up.

On the substance, Rand is right. They are still using the old AUFs from the Bush era after 9/11, just like 0bama did when he used those 9/11 AUFs to wade into the final destruction of Libya as a functioning nation.

Note that the scope of the actual AUMF is limited to Iraq.

AUMF, 16 Oct 2002, HJ Res 114, PL 107-323, 116 Stat 1498

Joint Resolution

To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq.

[...]

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This joint resolution may be cited as the ‘‘Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002’’.

SEC. 2. SUPPORT FOR UNITED STATES DIPLOMATIC EFFORTS.

The Congress of the United States supports the efforts by the President to—

(1) strictly enforce through the United Nations Security Council all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq and encourages him in those efforts; and

(2) obtain prompt and decisive action by the Security Council to ensure that Iraq abandons its strategy of delay, evasion and noncompliance and promptly and strictly complies with all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.

SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

(a) AUTHORIZATION.—The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to—

(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and

(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.

(b) PRESIDENTIAL DETERMINATION.—In connection with the exercise of the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President shall, prior to such exercise or as soon thereafter as may be feasible, but no later than 48 hours after exercising such authority, make available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate his determination that—

(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq; and

(2) acting pursuant to this joint resolution is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorist and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.

(c) WAR POWERS RESOLUTION REQUIREMENTS.—

(1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION.—Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution.

(2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS.—Nothing in this joint resolution supersedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution.

SEC. 4. REPORTS TO CONGRESS.

(a) REPORTS.—The President shall, at least once every 60 days, submit to the Congress a report on matters relevant to this joint resolution, including actions taken pursuant to the exercise of authority granted in section 3 and the status of planning for efforts that are expected to be required after such actions are completed, including those actions described in section 7 of the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (Public Law 105–338).

AUMF, 16 Oct 2002, HJ Res 114, PL 107-323, 116 Stat 1498 ...blah-blah-blah...

That was the Iraq AUMF (which they are also still using).

The big one is the original one after 9/11.

Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists, 9/14/2001

"According to a report by the Congressional Research Service, published May 11, 2016, at that time the 2001 AUMF had been cited 37 times in connection with actions in 14 countries and on the high seas. The report stated that "Of the 37 occurrences, 18 were made during the Bush Administration, and 19 have been made during the Obama Administration." The countries that were mentioned in the report included Afghanistan, Cuba (Guantanamo Bay), Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Georgia, Iraq, Kenya, Libya, Philippines, Somalia, Syria and Yemen."

Like I said, Rand is right. It's like they are trying to still use FDR's declaration of war against Japan to keep fighting wars around the world.

Rand has tried to stop this before. How long do they get away with starting fresh wars based on an anti-terrorism AUMF, passed in the shock of attack only 3 days after 9/11, to use the military in unrelated actions all over the world that have no connection to the 9/11 attack?

Of course the Stain is opposed to any requirements of a president to come to Congress to derive authority for his war powers. Just use that old one that they cobbled together 15 years ago for 9/11 revenge and use it to attack anywhere and everywhere.

" John McStain is not happy "

TFB !!!!

I don't agree with McClain on everything but he is 100 % right in this case.

Songbird McCain would have us fight eternal war, making the MIC incredibly wealthy and powerful, while greatly weakening the country with $20T in debt.

What has been the military mission in the expensive wars we have been fighting? We freed Iraq from non-existent WMD? What did we accomplish there or elsewhere with total military victory?

America so weak that we couldn't fight our way out of a paper bag.

If you and Gatlin had succeeded in electing McCain president in '08, you'd now be speaking Chinese, and Alaska and Canada would be speaking Russian.