Rand Paul is Adamant Iran Poses no Immediate Threat
He wants Congress to take back its power to declare wars from rogue presidents engaging in forever wars
Can a president legitimately bomb Iran after a 47-year-old grudge match?
Senator Rand Paul just absolutely destroyed the notion of a perpetual 47-year grudge match against Iran being enough for a president to simply bomb them, in a clip tearing through social media.
Paul stated bluntly: “A 47-year-old conflict does not qualify.” He focused specifically on Iran’s nuclear aspirations, and asked directly whether current reports indicate an immediate and pressing danger sufficient enough to justify ignoring the Constitution and launching a unilateral bombing campaign.
This isn’t some theoretical debate. Paul’s advocacy revives one of the fundamental tenets of American democracy that has been buried beneath decades of presidential overreach.
The Letter of the Law
Under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, Congress holds the exclusive authority to formally declare war. However, since the passage of the 1973 War Powers Resolution, presidents from both political parties have used that law as a rubber-stamp to authorize their own versions of “limited,” never-ending interventions.
How does this work when any president can just make up whatever they want for “imminent”?
Paul’s argument is razor-sharp. He zeroes in on Iran’s nuclear program – a concern that has driven headlines for years. Enrichment levels are rising, and enrichment facilities continue to churn along.
Is there anything indicative of an “imminent” attack on our soil? Paul believes not, and he is right to say so and has historical precedent backing him. The term “imminent threat” implies immediacy: an attack is either underway or will be launched immediately. It does not imply vague escalations, nor does it refer to 40-plus-year-long conflicts.
Iran’s 47 year conflict started in 1979 with the hostage crisis and has been ongoing since through proxy conflicts, sanctions, saber-rattling etc. Intelligence reports show uranium stockpiles are approaching weapons grade levels, the IAEA reports that Iran could potentially produce material needed for a weapon within weeks if it wanted to.
Threats do not Equate to Action
Paul pounds home the key point: theory is not imminence. There is no public evidence indicating Tehran has armed missiles for launch or is transferring nukes to terrorists who plan to attack.
Congress has allowed this type of thing before and the costs continue to mount. The 2001 authorization for use of military force was originally intended as a blank check for military action against al-qaeda following 911.
Instead it became a blank check for operations in over dozen countries.
Libya in 2011? Obama called it “Kinetic military action” which did not require congressional approval. Strikes on Syria by Trump were similar.
Now whispers about preemptively attacking Iran echo the same playbook.
Paul isn’t buying it. Paid subscribers can find out why below.
