Lawmaker wants stronger say in declaring war

[unhappycamper]

Lawmaker wants stronger say in declaring war
By Andrew Miga - The Associated Press
Posted : Saturday Nov 24, 2007 15:26:10 EST

WASHINGTON — Rep. William Delahunt says it’s high time to start thinking about the next war.

Even as Congress wrestles with attempts to bring home U.S. troops from Iraq, the Massachusetts Democrat is teaming up with some Republican colleagues on legislation to give Congress a stronger say in when the country should go to war.

Delahunt recently joined Republican Reps. Walter Jones of North Carolina, Wayne Gilchrest of Maryland and 2008 presidential candidate Ron Paul of Texas on a measure that would limit the president’s ability to go to war without Congress’ approval.

The resolution would prohibit the president from ordering military action without congressional approval unless the U.S. or its troops were attacked, or if U.S. citizens abroad need to be protected or evacuated.

The bill would amend the War Powers Resolution, which was enacted during the Vietnam War in 1973 over then-President Richard Nixon’s veto. The War Powers Resolution was aimed at restoring Congress’ control over the use of U.S. military force and required the president to report any military action to Congress within 48 hours. It also required the president to withdraw forces after 60 to 90 days if Congress didn’t explicitly pass an extension. But Congress has often been reluctant to challenge presidents with troops in harms way.

Under the Constitution, lawmakers have the ability to declare war and fund military operations, while the president has control of military forces.


Rest of article at: http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/11/ap_delahunt_071124/



uhc comment: Article 1, Section 8 of the United States constitution sez:

The Congress shall have the power 'To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;'

http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#A1Sec8

I wonder when that was revoked. :think:

[sam sarrha]

1. but our wet brain alcoholic 'Decider DickTatter' don't need no stink'n Constitution to declare war

[no_hypocrisy]

2. They also gotta work on the definition of "war" too.

The last 3-4 military adventures have not been instigated under the guise of war but a military police project or a preemptive strike. Even Iraq has not yet been termed a "war" by the White House but there's no end in sight. If Congress could delineate more specifically that the President cannot commit our military at his whim, even if it isn't a black-and-white "war", I think this country, the world, and our military would be much better off. If there were a true emergency, we know from past experience that the democrats will provide whatever is necessary instead of politicizing the matter.

[unhappycamper]

3. IIRC, the Korean war was a 'Police Action'.

Not sure what they called Guatemala, Haiti, Grenada, Kosovo. . .:shrug:

[NYVet]

4. I thought that we did declare war.

I mean, we have House Joint Resolution 77, from the 102nd Congress that is titled "Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002". That is pretty straight forward in the title.




I guess you learn something new every day.