Graham to roll out ISIS war legislation
© Getty Images

Sen. Lindsey GrahamLindsey Olin GrahamGOP and Dems bitterly divided by immigration We are running out of time to protect Dreamers US trade deficit rises on record imports from China MORE (R-S.C.) on Wednesday said he will introduce a wide-ranging authorization for war against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS). 

“I’m going to introduce an authorization to use military force against ISIL that is not limited by time, geography or means," said Graham, who is running for president. "We only have two choices regarding ISIL — fight them in their backyard or fight them in ours. I choose to fight them in their backyard.”
 
ADVERTISEMENT
Graham, considered a defense hawk, has put foreign policy and national security at the center of his presidential campaign. His legislation would place no geographic limits on U.S. military operations against the terrorist group, noting that the military must be able to fight the organization "wherever, whenever, and however." 
 
It would also not have an expiration date and would not prohibit the president from placing boots on the ground to fight ISIS. 
 
He added Wednesday that "we must allow this president and every future President to do whatever is necessary to destroy ISIL before they hit us here at home." Graham didn't specify when he would introduce the legislation.
 
The bill would face an uphill battle in Congress, where an authorization for the use of military force (AUMF) has failed to gain momentum. 
  
Democrats have voiced strong skepticism over a proposal that wouldn't explicitly rule out ground combat troops, and leadership in both chambers have suggested a new AUMF is unlikely to gain traction. 
 
Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), who chairs the Foreign Relations Committee that Graham's proposal would likely need to go through, said earlier this month that he didn't see a war bill being taken up "any time soon." 
 
Graham appeared to acknowledge the uphill fight that a war proposal against ISIS faces. Asked by reporters whether he thought lawmakers could reach an agreement on an AUMF, he said "absolutely not." 
 
"I think Democrats and a few Republicans have absolutely no clue as to the threats that we face," he said earlier this month. "We're going to get attacked from Syria. That's where the next 9/11 is coming from. After that happens, and I pray that I'm wrong, everybody will take a different view."
 
President Obama submitted a draft proposal earlier this year, but it sparked concerns from lawmakers in both parties over language banning any "enduring offensive ground combat operations."
 
Republicans feared the language would restrict the military's options, while Democrats argued that it was vague enough to open the door to ground troops and ensnare the U.S. in another Middle East war.
 
Since then, a bipartisan group of senators have introduced legislation to place broad limits on Obama's Syria strategy, by blocking the administration from using any funding that would "have the effect of, supporting, directly or indirectly, military or paramilitary operations in Syria by any nation, group, organization, movement, or individual."