The Constitution states that only Congress has the power to declare war. We last declared war in 1941. Since then we have had large and small commitments of troops to fight wars ranging from Korea to Grenada. Now, the President as commander and chief is actively planning some type of military action against Iraq if they do not comply with UN Resolutions to allow inspectors to see if weapons of mass destruction are present in Iraq. If American troops go into battle over this issue, should the Congress declare a state of war?
DJ
History Club
Military history and past events only. Rants or inflamitory comments will be removed.
Military history and past events only. Rants or inflamitory comments will be removed.
Hosted by Frank Amato
Declaration of War
210cav
Member Since: February 05, 2002
entire network: 6,149 Posts
KitMaker Network: 1,551 Posts
Posted: Monday, October 07, 2002 - 12:05 AM UTC
shiryon
Member Since: April 26, 2002
entire network: 876 Posts
KitMaker Network: 256 Posts
Posted: Monday, October 07, 2002 - 12:41 AM UTC
I think any action directed against anothe r soverein nation should require a declaration. Other wise we run the risk of someone like GW running off to war against any slight to his manhood(or his fathers).I think the President should have sole resposibility for running the war, but more than one brain needs to decide to send men to war.
Josh
aKa shiryon
Josh
aKa shiryon
210cav
Member Since: February 05, 2002
entire network: 6,149 Posts
KitMaker Network: 1,551 Posts
Posted: Monday, October 07, 2002 - 02:34 AM UTC
Josh---how do you feel about declaring war against Iran? Should we do it?
DJ
DJ
mj
Member Since: March 16, 2002
entire network: 1,331 Posts
KitMaker Network: 334 Posts
Posted: Monday, October 07, 2002 - 06:21 AM UTC
I believe that if we go it alone against Iraq, Congress needs to declare that a state of war exists between our two countries. If we were part of a UN supported "action" against Iraq, I don't think we would need to do this, as we would simply be fulfilling our responsibility to that world organization. But, invading Iraq alone is an act of war, plain and simple. Congress has a constitutional rrequirement to get involved, as I understand that document.
Mike
Mike
210cav
Member Since: February 05, 2002
entire network: 6,149 Posts
KitMaker Network: 1,551 Posts
Posted: Monday, October 07, 2002 - 06:41 AM UTC
Quoted Text
I believe that if we go it alone against Iraq, Congress needs to declare that a state of war exists between our two countries. If we were part of a UN supported "action" against Iraq, I don't think we would need to do this, as we would simply be fulfilling our responsibility to that world organization. But, invading Iraq alone is an act of war, plain and simple. Congress has a constitutional rrequirement to get involved, as I understand that document.
Mike
Mike--I know that declaring a state of war exists also gives the belligerents certain rights under international law (blockades, seizure of assets, etc.) As more poeple pile onto this issue, we need to see why they believe the Congress has not done this since 1941.
thanks
DJ
sniper
Member Since: May 07, 2002
entire network: 1,065 Posts
KitMaker Network: 497 Posts
Posted: Monday, October 07, 2002 - 07:46 AM UTC
Quoted Text
The Constitution states that only Congress has the power to declare war. We last declared war in 1941.
...
DJ
Was watching Histroy channel last night and they said that Congress has only issued a declaration of war 5 times, with the Desert Storm being the 6th.
Did they get it wrong? (Say it ain't so!)
Was there no decleration of war? Only an authorization to use force? And, I don't believe the President needs a declaration to use force. Look at the strikes against bin Laden after the Cole bombing, etc... Did the Congress have to approve this?
Steve
210cav
Member Since: February 05, 2002
entire network: 6,149 Posts
KitMaker Network: 1,551 Posts
Posted: Monday, October 07, 2002 - 08:02 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextThe Constitution states that only Congress has the power to declare war. We last declared war in 1941.
...
DJ
Was watching Histroy channel last night and they said that Congress has only issued a declaration of war 5 times, with the Desert Storm being the 6th.
Did they get it wrong? (Say it ain't so!)
Was there no decleration of war? Only an authorization to use force? And, I don't believe the President needs a declaration to use force. Look at the strikes against bin Laden after the Cole bombing, etc... Did the Congress have to approve this?
Steve
Steve--I am going out on a strong limb here. The Congress did not declare war on Iraq. They issued, as I recall, a joint resolution supporting the President taking military action in support of the UN resolution. The President has wide latitude to employ forces to defend the US and our interest. If he can and does do this, are declarations of war "obsolete"?
DJ
GunTruck
Member Since: December 01, 2001
entire network: 5,885 Posts
KitMaker Network: 1,405 Posts
Posted: Monday, October 07, 2002 - 08:20 AM UTC
Maybe the question is: what does a Declaration of War mean and what does it include? Here is a copy of the December 8, 1941 US Declaration of War against Japan:
JOINT RESOLUTION Declaring that a state of war exists between the Imperial Government of Japan and the Government and the people of the United States and making provisions to prosecute the same.
Whereas the Imperial Government of Japan has committed unprovoked acts of war against the Government and the people of the United States of America: Therefore be it Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the state of war between the United States and the Imperial Government of Japan which has thus been thrust upon the United States is hereby formally declared; and the President is hereby authorized and directed to employ the entire naval and military forces of the United States and the resources of the Government to carry on war against the Imperial Government of Japan; and, to bring the conflict to a successful termination, all of the resources of the country are hereby pledged by the Congress of the United States.
Approved, December 8, 1941, 4:10 p.m. E.S.T.
When I think of the Declaration of War, I envision the US using any and every weapon in this country's arsenal, means, political will, covert tactic, and national resource to the expressed defeat of said enemy. Now, I'm not implying that the US hasn't tossed it in full-bore since WW II, but assuming my assumption valid - it would explain "limiting" actions taken in conflicts since and why the US limits deployments and types of weaponry, in certain actions, and the War Powers Act creation.
Just my thoughts...
Gunnie
JOINT RESOLUTION Declaring that a state of war exists between the Imperial Government of Japan and the Government and the people of the United States and making provisions to prosecute the same.
Whereas the Imperial Government of Japan has committed unprovoked acts of war against the Government and the people of the United States of America: Therefore be it Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the state of war between the United States and the Imperial Government of Japan which has thus been thrust upon the United States is hereby formally declared; and the President is hereby authorized and directed to employ the entire naval and military forces of the United States and the resources of the Government to carry on war against the Imperial Government of Japan; and, to bring the conflict to a successful termination, all of the resources of the country are hereby pledged by the Congress of the United States.
Approved, December 8, 1941, 4:10 p.m. E.S.T.
When I think of the Declaration of War, I envision the US using any and every weapon in this country's arsenal, means, political will, covert tactic, and national resource to the expressed defeat of said enemy. Now, I'm not implying that the US hasn't tossed it in full-bore since WW II, but assuming my assumption valid - it would explain "limiting" actions taken in conflicts since and why the US limits deployments and types of weaponry, in certain actions, and the War Powers Act creation.
Just my thoughts...
Gunnie
mj
Member Since: March 16, 2002
entire network: 1,331 Posts
KitMaker Network: 334 Posts
Posted: Monday, October 07, 2002 - 08:28 AM UTC
I wouldn't say declarations of war are obsolete, but I will admit to being awfully confused about the issue sometimes. I mean, sometimes the President asks congress for permission (or maybe a supporting statement) like the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, before committing troops. Sometimes, it seems he justs reacts to defend the US, such as the strikes after the Cole, and even when Reagan went after Khaddaffi.
It seems that if we are acting in concert with the UN, or if the President is reacting to a strike against the US or US citizens, all that is needed (not sure if its manditory) is a stateent of support from congress. But, if we hit someone with the express purpose of bringing down the existing governmental structure, well, that sounds like we are going to war with that nation, and it seems to me a declaration of war is necessary.
Mike
It seems that if we are acting in concert with the UN, or if the President is reacting to a strike against the US or US citizens, all that is needed (not sure if its manditory) is a stateent of support from congress. But, if we hit someone with the express purpose of bringing down the existing governmental structure, well, that sounds like we are going to war with that nation, and it seems to me a declaration of war is necessary.
Mike
Whiskey
Member Since: May 30, 2002
entire network: 1,038 Posts
KitMaker Network: 0 Posts
Posted: Monday, October 07, 2002 - 08:31 AM UTC
I was reading a article on MSN about this earlier today and they said a cogressional approval of war against Iraq would pass with little resintment.
My words on this is it's about bloody time.
My words on this is it's about bloody time.
staff_Jim
PublisherMember Since: December 15, 2001
entire network: 12,571 Posts
KitMaker Network: 4,397 Posts
Posted: Monday, October 07, 2002 - 08:48 AM UTC
Another question would be...
When was the last time a country "officially" declared war on another country? Seems like it's not just us (the US) but the whole concept is out of date with modern war.
Jim
When was the last time a country "officially" declared war on another country? Seems like it's not just us (the US) but the whole concept is out of date with modern war.
Jim
Folgore
Member Since: May 31, 2002
entire network: 1,109 Posts
KitMaker Network: 0 Posts
Posted: Monday, October 07, 2002 - 09:05 AM UTC
Check this article out: War declaration replaced by ’73 law
Also, I am reading a few books on the "Undeclared War" undertaken by Roosevelt between 1939 and 1941for a paper I am writing. It's actually pretty interesting and shows just how much a president is able to do without complete support of Congress or even the population.
Nic
Also, I am reading a few books on the "Undeclared War" undertaken by Roosevelt between 1939 and 1941for a paper I am writing. It's actually pretty interesting and shows just how much a president is able to do without complete support of Congress or even the population.
Nic
clovis899
#155
Member Since: May 05, 2002
entire network: 774 Posts
KitMaker Network: 127 Posts
Posted: Monday, October 07, 2002 - 11:22 AM UTC
Great question!
Remember the Constitution is a very pliable document, in effect it means whatever "we" want it to mean, just ask an unborn child about the right to privacy. Does Congress need to declare war? Not if they pass a resolution on the use of force, the resolution becomes a de facto declaration of war. Does it have to be in support of an international obligation, i.e. the U.N., not necessarily. Nor does it need to be because of a treaty obligation. It can be whatever Congress decides it wants it to be. So is the declaration of war obsolete, it sure appears that way!
Regarding the use of force after the U.S.S. Cole attack and other incidents, the President has limited authority to order the use of force in the national interest at any time and anywhere without Congressional approval. He (or she one day) may not authorize the use of force over a long term period of time without the stamp of approval from Congress. ( I think 30 days is the limit IIRC)
Rick Cooper
Remember the Constitution is a very pliable document, in effect it means whatever "we" want it to mean, just ask an unborn child about the right to privacy. Does Congress need to declare war? Not if they pass a resolution on the use of force, the resolution becomes a de facto declaration of war. Does it have to be in support of an international obligation, i.e. the U.N., not necessarily. Nor does it need to be because of a treaty obligation. It can be whatever Congress decides it wants it to be. So is the declaration of war obsolete, it sure appears that way!
Regarding the use of force after the U.S.S. Cole attack and other incidents, the President has limited authority to order the use of force in the national interest at any time and anywhere without Congressional approval. He (or she one day) may not authorize the use of force over a long term period of time without the stamp of approval from Congress. ( I think 30 days is the limit IIRC)
Rick Cooper
210cav
Member Since: February 05, 2002
entire network: 6,149 Posts
KitMaker Network: 1,551 Posts
Posted: Monday, October 07, 2002 - 12:10 PM UTC
If you look at Gunnie's comments, you can see that a "declaration of war" can be written in various formats. As Rick points out, our Constitution is flexible enough for the employment of force in support of our best interest. Franklin Roosevelt ask Congress to "declare that a state of war now exists" against the Japanese the day after Pearl Harbor. Should the President seek a Congressional resolution of support to employ force against Iraq or does he need to ask Congress to "declare that a state of war exists"?
What do you think?
DJ
What do you think?
DJ
GunTruck
Member Since: December 01, 2001
entire network: 5,885 Posts
KitMaker Network: 1,405 Posts
Posted: Monday, October 07, 2002 - 12:49 PM UTC
Good question! I feel that Congress needs to declare that a state of war exists between the two countries - if it so does presently - and not wait for the President to seek another Congressional Resolution to allow (again) more hostilities. This has already been done - the Resolution - how many Resolutions does it take to define a State of War?
Gunnie
Gunnie
clovis899
#155
Member Since: May 05, 2002
entire network: 774 Posts
KitMaker Network: 127 Posts
Posted: Monday, October 07, 2002 - 06:36 PM UTC
It may only be semantics, but if you have a joint resolution on the use of force in your hand don't you still have another card to play in a DofW? Maybe, just maybe, that is why the President has not asked Congress to take that final step. That gives him a political fallback position that might sound like this, "No Ted, we did not declare war on Iraq, we only took steps to eliminate weapons of MD and remove the current regime, we have no quarrel with the people of Iraq. In fact, we are here to help them in any way that we can to rebuild their economy and insure freedom for all in a democratic society" Sounds reasonable, what do you folks think?
Coop
Coop
210cav
Member Since: February 05, 2002
entire network: 6,149 Posts
KitMaker Network: 1,551 Posts
Posted: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 - 12:24 AM UTC
As I read this latest series of posts, I am coming to the conclusion that a "declaration of war" such as Roosevelt secured from the Congress is purposely not being sought. The reason why it is not the tool of choice appears to me to be one of flexibility. If you get the resolution that states "we declare war" then you are bound by numerous conventions, protocols, and international law. However, if the President request Congress provide him a joint resolution that allows him to use force, you gain a greater degree of flexibility. It would be questionable that the declaration of war norms apply. The high and low side of the hysteria that follows a declaration are eliminated. The President has the will of the Congress backing him up. So, I think it is not a question that a declaration of war is an obsolete term, but rather that a joint resolution is just as effective an authorization document. If I have seen the light, it is in no small part due to the quality of this diiscussion.
For that my Friends you have my thanks
DJ
For that my Friends you have my thanks
DJ
sgtreef
Member Since: March 01, 2002
entire network: 6,043 Posts
KitMaker Network: 1,603 Posts
Posted: Wednesday, October 09, 2002 - 12:29 AM UTC
Question did we ever declare War on Germany? 
210cav
Member Since: February 05, 2002
entire network: 6,149 Posts
KitMaker Network: 1,551 Posts
Posted: Wednesday, October 09, 2002 - 02:30 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Question did we ever declare War on Germany?
Jeff---I believe we did after crazy Adolph declared war on us. I also think that date was December 8, 1941.
DJ
Folgore
Member Since: May 31, 2002
entire network: 1,109 Posts
KitMaker Network: 0 Posts
Posted: Wednesday, October 09, 2002 - 06:07 AM UTC
Actually, Germany and Italy declared war on the US on December 11, 1941. Later that day, the US responded with their own declaration of war.
I would also like to know who was the last to make a declaration of war. I have checked a few resources, but can't find anything. I can tell you that there was no declaration of war for the Falklands War, but that doesn't help much. I think it is because "wars" these days tend to begin with minor events that escalate into something larger that don't really seem like a war at first. The Falklands War is a good example.
Nic
I would also like to know who was the last to make a declaration of war. I have checked a few resources, but can't find anything. I can tell you that there was no declaration of war for the Falklands War, but that doesn't help much. I think it is because "wars" these days tend to begin with minor events that escalate into something larger that don't really seem like a war at first. The Falklands War is a good example.
Nic
210cav
Member Since: February 05, 2002
entire network: 6,149 Posts
KitMaker Network: 1,551 Posts
Posted: Wednesday, October 09, 2002 - 06:26 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Actually, Germany and Italy declared war on the US on December 11, 1941. Later that day, the US responded with their own declaration of war.
I would also like to know who was the last to make a declaration of war. I have checked a few resources, but can't find anything. I can tell you that there was no declaration of war for the Falklands War, but that doesn't help much. I think it is because "wars" these days tend to begin with minor events that escalate into something larger that don't really seem like a war at first. The Falklands War is a good example.
Nic
Nic--I'll spit ball a response and say the last time someone "declared" a state of war was probably during the Gulf War. I think Iraq declared war, but no one was too interested in what they said at that stage of the action. It would also not surprise me if some Third World Nations banter the term around. However that may be, I would believe that the last time any of the Big Four Nations did it was during the WW II era.
DJ
drewgimpy
Member Since: January 24, 2002
entire network: 835 Posts
KitMaker Network: 350 Posts
Posted: Wednesday, October 09, 2002 - 08:51 PM UTC
Quoted Text
I think the President should have sole resposibility for running the war, but more than one brain needs to decide to send men to war.
That's pretty much how our Constitution works. In my mind the main reason that war has not been declared since WWII is that Congress has not wanted to hand that much control to the Pres. They are always fighting to have as much power as they can especially when it comes to the executive branch. I think it's a good thing most of the time keeping things "checked and balanced" but sometimes there is too much pride from Congress and they do things they shouldn't just to prove who has the power or authority. If Congress just declares a use of force, then they can still step in and control some things like funding the "conflict". If they declare war they hand it all over to the President and that's why they don't do it any more in my opinion. Declarations of war have usually come at much more drastic times when we have no choice but to act. Some can argue that if we leave Sadam alone nothing will happen and in the very near future they may be correct (although I feel if we don't take him out soon we will pay for it). There isn't an all out need to stop him to survive and that's usually when we declare war. But more than that I feel its Congress holding on to power.
sgtreef
Member Since: March 01, 2002
entire network: 6,043 Posts
KitMaker Network: 1,603 Posts
Posted: Wednesday, October 09, 2002 - 11:18 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextQuestion did we ever declare War on Germany?
Jeff---I believe we did after crazy Adolph declared war on us. I also think that date was December 8, 1941.
DJ
Thanks DJ and Folgore for clearing that up. Strange why we declared War on Japan so fast but really went after Hiltler first.
Folgore
Member Since: May 31, 2002
entire network: 1,109 Posts
KitMaker Network: 0 Posts
Posted: Thursday, October 10, 2002 - 05:05 AM UTC
Quoted Text
I think the President should have sole resposibility for running the war, but more than one brain needs to decide to send men to war.
Not all presidents are military geniuses. The way I understand it, the men at the Constitution Convention made the president commander in chief of the army and navy because it was obvious who was going to be their first president: George Washington. Washington was already commander in chief. I see what you mean though about running the war, though. Most likely one president will listen better to miltary advisors than Congress would.
Quoted Text
Strange why we declared War on Japan so fast but really went after Hiltler first.
I guess it might seem a little strange, Jeff, but I think it was the right decision. Germany clearly was the stronger Axis partner militarily and economically (I think Germany manufactured something like 2000 planes a month compared to Japan's 200). If Germany was allowed to win in Europe, it didn't make much difference what happened in the Pacific. Anyway, that's another topic.........
Nic
210cav
Member Since: February 05, 2002
entire network: 6,149 Posts
KitMaker Network: 1,551 Posts
Posted: Thursday, October 10, 2002 - 07:51 AM UTC
Nic--try a shot at the Iraq question.
DJ
DJ
 |
WEB HOSTING BY
Copyright ©2021 KitMaker Network and Kitmaker Network, a subsidiary of Silver Star Enterprises
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.