When Congress passed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution in 1964, most members didn’t believe they were voting for a decade of all-out war in Vietnam. Eventually, Richard Nixon proclaimed he didn’t need even need the resolution to keep waging war in Vietnam.

Many in Congress in 2001 considered the post-Sept. 11 Authorization for the Use of Military Force a declaration of war against the Taliban in Afghanistan, or a license to kill Osama bin Laden. Presidents Bush and Obama have since used this AUMF as justification for detaining terrorist suspects without charges at Guantanamo Bay, conducting drone strikes in Yemen and Pakistan, and occupying Afghanistan for 10 years.

If you give a president a little bit of power in one area, he will take a lot of power in that area.

Perhaps with these lessons in mind, both Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill have criticized Obama’s draft war resolution as overly broad. They are correct, but many of them are just posturing.

It’s standard stuff for lawmakers presented with an unpopular proposal: Express concern, say the first draft is unacceptable, demand changes — then after some tweaks, declare the final product imperfect but acceptable.