<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr"><div>This is the first ink on this I've seen. <br></div><div><br></div><div>Now we're going to separate the sheep from the goats. <br></div><div><br></div><div>Now we're going find out who really believes that Article I of the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution of 1973 are good law and who was only pretending. <br></div><div><br></div><div>Remember what our friends said on the Senate floor when the Yemen War Powers Resolution was first being debated: if you think the U.S. military should be doing this, introduce an AUMF and call the roll. <br></div><div><br></div><div><a href="https://news.antiwar.com/2019/11/03/tulsi-gabbard-introduces-bill-to-withdraw-troops-from-syria/" target="_blank">https://news.antiwar.com/2019/11/03/tulsi-gabbard-introduces-bill-to-withdraw-troops-from-syria/</a></div><div>
<h1>Tulsi Gabbard Introduces Bill to Withdraw Troops from Syria</h1> <span>Resolution Says Syrian Oil Belongs to Syria</span>
<span><span><span></span> <a href="https://news.antiwar.com/author/dave_decamp/" target="_blank">Dave DeCamp</a></span></span> <span><span><br>Posted on </span><a href="https://news.antiwar.com/2019/11/03/tulsi-gabbard-introduces-bill-to-withdraw-troops-from-syria/" rel="bookmark" target="_blank">November 3, 2019</a></span><span><span><br><br></span></span>Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-concurrent-resolution/70/text/ih" target="_blank">introduced a resolution</a> to the House of Representatives on October 31<sup>st</sup>
titled, “Directing the President pursuant to section 5(c) of the War
Powers Resolution to remove United States Armed Forces from hostilities
in the Syrian Arab Republic that have not been authorized by Congress.”<div>
<p>The idea of the bill is to remove any troops in Syria that do not
have Congressional approval to be there, which is all of them. The
resolution says, “Congress has not declared war with respect to, or
provided any specific statutory authorization for, United States
military participation in any activity related to securing, guarding,
possessing, profiting off of, or developing oil fields in northern
Syria. All of these actions are unconstitutional.”</p>
<p>The resolution also points out that President Trump’s new plan to
stay in Syria to “secure the oil” is a flagrant violation of
international law. The resolution says, “Oil, natural resources, and
land in Syria belong to the Syrian people, not the United States.”</p>
<p>Although the House was quick to condemn Trump’s withdrawal from
northeast Syria to avoid a confrontation with Turkey, his new plan to
“secure the oil” has not come under much scrutiny. The language in
Gabbard’s bill would make it tough for any member of Congress to argue
against it. </p></div></div><div><br></div></div>
</div></div>
</div></div>