When I joined the U.S. Army in 2004, I was ready to go to war. I trained as a combat medic, and with the Iraq War underway, I knew a deployment was imminent.
Two years later, I was on my way to Mosul. I served there for 15 months and saw some of the worst of war. But I also served with incredible people. We served honorably, with a deep love for this country.
If I had to do it over again, I would.
Those of us who answered the call to serve honored our oath to “support and defend.” I’m proud of the job we did in Iraq. But I also believe it’s time to look critically at why American troops are still in harm’s way in Iraq.
To say American troops shouldn’t be in Iraq anymore doesn’t disparage the sacrifices my fellow soldiers and I made. On the contrary, I believe it honors our service to make honest assessments about the war and about the future of troops on the ground.
My assessment brings me to one clear conclusion: We as soldiers held up our end of the bargain, often at the expense of our bodies and minds. Congress has not held up its end, relinquishing its war power responsibility and dodging difficult decisions.
The lack of accountability on authorizations for use of military force (AUMF) is a prime example.
Congress’ constitutional role includes declaration and oversight of war. In some situations, lawmakers pass an AUMF to give the president authority to take military action. These authorizations act as an alternative to formally declaring war, something the United States hasn’t done since World War II.
The Gulf War and the Iraq War were authorized under AUMFs. That is where the problem starts.
The 1991 and 2002 AUMFs contain broad language allowing military action in Iraq, with little information about what an accomplished mission looks like. Worse, there is no end date associated with either AUMF. Although the Gulf War happened 30 years ago, and the Iraq War started nearly 20 years ago, both AUMFs are still in place.
This is dangerous because it means the executive branch has authority to send troops into Iraq at any time without consulting Congress. Congress has surrendered its say — and constitutional responsibility — by allowing outdated AUMFs to stay on the books.
In so doing, Congress has handed a succession of presidents blank checks for military action and neglected its duty to oversee those actions. This trend must end now.
Luckily, Virginian members have been leading the charge to rein in war powers. Sen. Tim Kaine introduced a bipartisan bill to repeal both the 1991 and 2002 AUMFs. Rep. Abigail Spanberger introduced multiple bipartisan bills to repeal outdated AUMFs.
These are welcome moves to Iraq veterans who want to protect our troops from needless danger. Polling shows more than two-thirds of veterans want the U.S. to withdraw from Iraq. A vast majority of the public says our country should be less militarily engaged.
Americans want to get out of Iraq, and our leaders have a moral responsibility to employ troops only in defense of America’s national interests. That’s why my organization is calling for a full withdrawal of troops from Iraq. We’re gathering support from across the country, including at a rally in Norfolk on Saturday, to let lawmakers know their constituents want a better approach to foreign policy.
As someone who served, it’s my responsibility to call for an end to military engagement in Iraq. Our presence does not serve a vital national interest and puts troops in unnecessary danger. I will continue to call for policies that ensure my fellow soldiers are only placed in harm’s way when absolutely necessary. I urge veterans of all American wars to do the same.
Roseanne Rodriguez is a coalitions director with Concerned Veterans for America in Virginia and a veteran of the Iraq War.
