Should Congress Have Issued An Official Declaration of War?

[Paulie]

Self explanatory.

Please explain why or why not.

 

[Annie]

Self explanatory.

Please explain why or why not.

Yes, it was their duty via the Constitution, problem is this usurpation goes back a long ways. Then again, GW should have asked for one, just like FDR did.

 

[Gunny]

Yes Congress should have declared war. It was completely irresponsible behavior for Congress to pass its authority off to the President. It removed one of the checks and balances of power by doing so.

The President is the Commander in Chief of the military. He is not the King of the US. Bush has been one of the worst in recent times at grabbing and consolidating power within the Executive Branch. At the same time, Congress has let him do it. The current Democrat-controlled Congress, regardless their boasts, has done little if anything to reverse it.

I don't remember the last time in my lifetime Congress was worth a shit, regardless which party is in control. I sure as Hell don't recall the last time they actually represented the people of the United States.

 

[mattskramer]

Yes Congress should have declared war. It was completely irresponsible behavior for Congress to pass its authority off to the President. It removed one of the checks and balances of power by doing so.

The President is the Commander in Chief of the military. He is not the King of the US. Bush has been one of the worst in recent times at grabbing and consolidating power within the Executive Branch. At the same time, Congress has let him do it. The current Democrat-controlled Congress, regardless their boasts, has done little if anything to reverse it.

I don't remember the last time in my lifetime Congress was worth a shit, regardless which party is in control. I sure as Hell don't recall the last time they actually represented the people of the United States.

Okay. At first, I didn’t grasp the meaning of the question.

On the one hand, Congress should not declare war in this case because I don’t see that war was warranted. On the other hand, if we are debating proper procedure, then, if congressmen wanted to have us really go to war, then the answer is: yes.

At first, I thought that this was a question about whether or not we should have gone to war. If that is the case, congress should not have authorized the president. Nor should it have declared war. Now I see the point. Yes, it was irresponsible for congress to “pass the buck” as it did. If there is a question about going to war, congress should either declare war or not declare war – not pass off the decision to the president.

 

[Paulie]

Okay. At first, I didn’t grasp the meaning of the question.

On the one hand, Congress should not declare war in this case because I don’t see that war was warranted. On the other hand, if we are debating proper procedure, then, if congressmen wanted to have us really go to war, then the answer is: yes.

At first, I thought that this was a question about whether or not we should have gone to war. If that is the case, congress should not have authorized the president. Nor should it have declared war. Now I see the point. Yes, it was irresponsible for congress to “pass the buck” as it did. If there is a question about going to war, congress should either declare war or not declare war – not pass off the decision to the president.

Come on dude, it really wasn't a tough question. We're not debating whether or not the war should have happened here. The war happened. All I'm asking is, especially since congress was overwhelmingly in support of it, should they have issued an official declaration.

Are you the "no" vote?

 

[mattskramer]

Are you the "no" vote?

Yes, but I want to change my vote. Yes yes yes yes yes - a thousand times yes

 

[Gunny]

Yes, but I want to change my vote. Yes yes yes yes yes - a thousand times yes

Heh ... this isn't a Democrat primary so you can only vote once.

However, you should feel all better now.

 

[mattskramer]

Heh ... this isn't a Democrat primary so you can only vote once.

However, you should feel all better now.

(LOL) Okay, but on the flip-side, thanks for understanding this voter’s intent and letting his vote count.

 

[Swamp Fox]

When Congress issued the resolution giving President Bush the power to use any and all means necessary to enforce the UN resolutions, they in effect, declared President Bush could declare war when he felt it was needed. So this whole poll is a moot point. Congress did pass a resolution authorizing the war and it passed with an overwhelming majority. And it has not been repealed by anyone in Congress because no one wants to go on record as being against a total victory.

 

[Ravi]

Self explanatory.

Please explain why or why not.

Against who, Saddam or terrorism?

 

[Annie]

When Congress issued the resolution giving President Bush the power to use any and all means necessary to enforce the UN resolutions, they in effect, declared President Bush could declare war when he felt it was needed. So this whole poll is a moot point. Congress did pass a resolution authorizing the war and it passed with an overwhelming majority. And it has not been repealed by anyone in Congress because no one wants to go on record as being against a total victory.

Obviously, Congress ceded their power, the executive picked it up, like for the past 50 years. Still wrong and there may come a price in time.

 

[Larkinn]

When Congress issued the resolution giving President Bush the power to use any and all means necessary to enforce the UN resolutions, they in effect, declared President Bush could declare war when he felt it was needed. So this whole poll is a moot point. Congress did pass a resolution authorizing the war and it passed with an overwhelming majority. And it has not been repealed by anyone in Congress because no one wants to go on record as being against a total victory.

Congress can't say that the president can declare war whenever its needed. The Constitution specifically says only Congress can declare war and to change that they need to change the Constitution, not just wish it away.

 

[mattskramer]

Congress can't say that the president can declare war whenever its needed. The Constitution specifically says only Congress can declare war and to change that they need to change the Constitution, not just wish it away.

Interpret it for yourself:

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=107_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ243.107

 

[Paulie]

Against who, Saddam or terrorism?

I thought it being in the "Iraq" forum was enough indication. I'm talking about the Iraq War.

Terrorism is a tactic, or an idea if you will. You can't declare war on an idea. That makes no sense.

 

[Gunny]

When Congress issued the resolution giving President Bush the power to use any and all means necessary to enforce the UN resolutions, they in effect, declared President Bush could declare war when he felt it was needed. So this whole poll is a moot point. Congress did pass a resolution authorizing the war and it passed with an overwhelming majority. And it has not been repealed by anyone in Congress because no one wants to go on record as being against a total victory.

I don't think Congress can legally cede the authority to declare war in the name of the United States, and it would seem foolish to me for COngress to do so. The authority and responsibilities of each branch of government are specifically spelled out in the Constitution.

Congress authorized Bush to use whatever force necessary. That is not an official and legal declaration of war, and it is basically IMO shirking their responsibility to carry out the duties of their appointed officees.

 

[p kirkes]

Terrorism is a tactic, or an idea if you will. You can't declare war on an idea. That makes no sense.

But we can declare war on an object - Drugs. And create a commanding Czar to carry out that war in foreign countries and also domesticly. Wonder how that war is coming along? Have we won yet? Can we have an idea when it might be finished or is it a never ending operation.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Congress can't say that the president can declare war whenever its needed. The Constitution specifically says only Congress can declare war and to change that they need to change the Constitution, not just wish it away.

Ya. You mean like how the Congress has created law after law and entity after entity since the 30's , completely against the Constitution? Congress did its duty it AUTHORIZED the President to conduct a war.

 

[Gunny]

Ya. You mean like how the Congress has created law after law and entity after entity since the 30's , completely against the Constitution? Congress did its duty it AUTHORIZED the President to conduct a war.

RGS,

That isn't the question. The question is should Congress have made an official Declaration of War? Not should Congress have authorized the President to use whatever means necessary.

That "authroization" had allowed a few Congresscritters to backpeddle and claim they didn't mean that Bush necessarily "had to" use force."

And correct me if I am wrong ... I really don't recall ... was not that authorization given in regard to pursuing the Taliban in Afhganistan? Or was it a separate authorization for Iraq?

 

[Gunny]

Nevermind. I found it.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021002-2.html

Still, Congress should not give up it's power to the Executive Branch. It clearly did so. If we are going to conduct a war -- the President should go to Congress and ask for a Declaration of War, not a blanket, open-ended statement, and Congress should either declare war or say no.

Circumventing the Constitution has become SOP in DC, and it needs to stop.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

RGS,

That isn't the question. The question is should Congress have made an official Declaration of War? Not should Congress have authorized the President to use whatever means necessary.

That "authroization" had allowed a few Congresscritters to backpeddle and claim they didn't mean that Bush necessarily "had to" use force."

And correct me if I am wrong ... I really don't recall ... was not that authorization given in regard to pursuing the Taliban in Afhganistan? Or was it a separate authorization for Iraq?

He got a separate authorization for both "invasions" as the Constitution requires. Congress can back pedal all they want, the Vote on the matter is PUBLIC knowledge. the Congress has voted EVERY year to continue the war, to include the last 2 years under Democratic control. There is no room for the Congress or member of it to claim any thing other than Congress supports the war.