WASHINGTON – Lawmakers are rallying around President Barack Obama’s plan to increase US military operations against the Islamic State, with some wanting stronger steps and few demanding Congress authorize the strikes.

Obama announced on Wednesday night that the United States will step up air strikes against the violent Sunni group, help indigenous forces and send nearly 500 more American troops to Iraq. He also signaled the US will hit Islamic State targets inside Syria.

"Working with the Iraqi government, we will expand our efforts beyond protecting our own people and humanitarian missions, so that we're hitting ISIL targets as Iraqi forces go on offense," Obama said in a prime time address.

The 475 US troops will bring the number of American troops Obama has sent back to Iraq to 1,618, an irony for a president who was initially elected largely due to a pledge to end the George W. Bush administration's 2003 Iraq war.

Obama said his administration's operations against al-Qaida cells in Yemen and Somalia, which have featured armed drone strikes and special operations raids, would be a model for the Iraq and Syria missions.

Lawmakers reacted to Obama's announcement with support. Some issued enthusiastic statements, calling the Islamic State (IS) a direct and immediate threat to the United States. Others reacted with cautious endorsements. But only a handful called for formal congressional authorization of the coming strikes and deployments.

The support came from both Obama's Democratic allies and his Republican critics.

"I believe that many of the elements he advocated are important and I support them. However, they are not enough to achieve his own stated goal of defeating [IS]," House Armed Services Committee Chairman Rep. Buck McKeon, R-Calif., said in a statement.

"The President used our strategy in Yemen and Somalia as examples of how the tactics he is recommending can contain violent terrorists. I would remind him that al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) remains the al-Qaida affiliate most capable of attacking the American homeland and exporting violent jihad," McKeon said. "Al Shabaab in Somalia continues to carry out attacks against American and Western interests, while recruiting fighters from the United States. The President's approach simply will not be adequate to address the threat posed by [IS] either."

Another critic, Senate Armed Services Committee Ranking Member Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., said Obama's speech merely "re-plowed the ground of what he has already done and requested what congressional leaders have already offered."

In one of the sharpest criticisms from Capitol Hill, Inhofe said the speech must have emboldened the Islamic State.

"I wanted him to be more honest with the American people, to say that ISIL has evolved into an extremist army with the potential to attack our homeland and to deliver a strategy to reflect this real concern," Inhofe said. "Tonight, the president's strategy at [IS] headquarters in Raqqa, Syria, you can hear a sigh of relief."

Inhofe echoed McKeon in saying, "this is not Yemen and Somalia, and a counterterrorism strategy will not be able to 'defeat or degrade' a terrorist group that has grown to be a well-funded, well-networked terrorist army."

The president's allies enthusiastically embraced the plan he laid out.

"The president tonight laid out a forceful strategy to safeguard our security and that of our allies by rolling back and eventually destroying a brutal extremist group. The president's strategy calls for a broad coalition to support Sunnis, Shiites, Kurds, and religious minorities as they come together to fight a common enemy," SASC Chairman Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., said in a statement.

"It does not call for American ground combat troops, which I believe are not only unnecessary, but could [impede] the effort by playing into the propaganda of the extremists. I support the president's strategy, and I believe a large majority of Congress and the American people will as well."

Levin said there is a "broad consensus" in Congress that America should do more against IS.

Another senior Democrat, Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, said she "fully support[s] President Obama's decision to utilize his authority to begin a counterterrorism effort against the terrorist army [IS].

"Now that a strategy has been outlined, it is critical that Congress and the American people come together in solidarity to support the president and our armed forces," Feinstein said. "On such an important matter of national security, we must show [IS] we have the political will, the military might and the strength of a united country.

"In my 14 years on the Senate Intelligence Committee, I have not seen a terrorist organization with the brutality and capabilities of [IS]," Feinstein said. "The group already occupies large swaths of territory in Iraq and Syria and poses a direct threat to the entire Middle East. [IS] has also repeatedly expressed its intent to attack the United States, most recently during the beheadings of two American journalists."

Obama did not ask Congress to authorize the strikes and new troop deployment, saying only that he would "welcome" congressional support.

Deputy House GOP Whip Rep. Tom Cole, R-Okla., and a few others called for Congress to authorize the strikes.

"The president would be well advised to seek congressional authorization for these actions as well as for the resources necessary to carry them out. I have no doubt that such authorization would be overwhelmingly supported by both houses of Congress and on both sides of the aisle," Cole said. "Americans, our friends and our enemies need to see the president and Congress united in their determination to destroy this very dangerous foe."

In a statement, Cole endorsed the strikes, saying he would "vote to give the president any authority and resources he needs to confront this urgent national security risk."

SASC member Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., a leading voice for reform of the authorization of the use of military force passed after 9/11, also called for Congress to vote.

"I support the president's goal and believe he will receive broad support from the American people. I disagree with the president's assertion that he has all necessary legal authority to wage an offensive war against ISIL without Congressional approval," Kaine said in a statement.

"But the president does acknowledge the need for Congressional approval of his plan to support the Syrian opposition and invites broader Congressional support of the multinational effort to defeat [IS]," Kaine said. "I look forward to working with my colleagues to craft a narrow authorization for that mission.

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., is crafting an authorization measure for the escalated strikes in Iraq and Syria, according to media reports.

But it is unclear if his panel, the full Senate or the House will ever take it up. Neither chamber's leader has said such a vote will occur. ■

Email: jbennett@defensenews.com.

Share:
In Other News
Load More