Congressional War Powers

Astro states as his main objection to Ron Paul is the good doctor's stance on the war. One of Ron Paul's biggest issues with the war is that it is unconstitutional. Let's look at that issue.

The Constitution defines the Congressional War Powers thusly:

United States Constitution Article 1 Section 8. The Congress shall have power to ... To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;

To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;

To provide and maintain a navy;

To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;

To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

Now that we know that it is within the power of Congress to declare war, and not that of the President lets see how this declaration of war has been made in the past:

WWII:

Whereas the Government of Germany has formally declared 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 Government of Germany 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 Government of Germany; 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 11, 1941, 3:05 p.m., E. S. T.

WWI gives us this Declaration of War:

WHEREAS, The Imperial German Government has committed repeated 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 German Government, which has thus been thrust upon the United States, is hereby formally declared; and

That the President be, and he 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 German Government; and to bring the conflict to a successful termination all the resources of the country are hereby pledged by the Congress of the United States.

One thing to point out is that these are very simple Declarations. No justification was really needed. In contrast the current ‘‘Authorization for
Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002’’ is 6 pages long. The resolution starts at the bottom of page four and I am cutting this down for brevity. Please see the cull document here (PDF)

Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled,
The Congress of the United States supports the efforts by
the President to—
(1) strictly enforce through the United Nations Security
Council all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq
and encourages him in those efforts; and
(2) obtain prompt and decisive action by the Security
Council to ensure that Iraq abandons its strategy of delay,
evasion and noncompliance and promptly and strictly complies
with all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.
SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.
(a) AUTHORIZATION.—The President is authorized to use the
Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary
and appropriate in order to—
(1) defend the national security of the United States against
the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and
(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council
resolutions regarding Iraq.

SEC. 4. REPORTS TO CONGRESS.
(a) REPORTS.—The President shall, at least once every 60 days,
submit to the Congress a report on matters relevant to this joint
resolution, including actions taken pursuant to the exercise of
authority granted in section 3 and the status of planning for efforts
that are expected to be required after such actions are completed,
including those actions described in section 7 of the Iraq Liberation
Act of 1998 (Public Law 105–338).

These are very different and the latest clearly is not a Declaration of War as a simple reading of the Constitution would seem to require. Obviously we new this in the past but in today's world our politician's choose expediency to Constitutionality.

Now I kept up Section 4 because I wanted to point out where this current "war" came from. It started back in 98 under Clinton. And this is where Dr Paul's opposition started. Paul knew that this would lead to an aggressive war and indeed it has. Paul pushed his colleagues to reconsider their support for the Iraq Liberation Act and tried to keep the bill from passing. Despite Paul's efforts we have become an aggressive nation, a danger to smaller countries and mark my words, this WILL come back to bite us. A few more such aggressive wars and the moment we start rattling sabers at a small country they will know that the end for them is near and there is nothing they can do to stop it so they will attack us anyways in the attitude that it is better to die on your feet than live on your knees.

I do not have a problem with war itself. I do think that war should be legal in our own country and should be covered under the just war doctrine. In other words, start nothing, finish everything. Currently it looks like we are starting everything and finishing nothing. We are still in Afghanistan and on our third premise for being there. We are in Iraq and have completed only one of our objectives, even though getting Saddam was the only objective at the start. And then we failed to even have a proper trial for him. What he received was a politically motivated kangaroo court. One would think that with all the crimes that could be put against Saddam that a proper trial could have been held, but no, we failed on that count as well.

I will post more on the Iraq "war" and Ron Paul soon, as this post covers but one aspect (legality.)