What stops the USA from officially declaring war?

Question

I asked a question earlier if the USA was officially at war, but since we're not, what is stopping the declaration?

I was referring to Iraq and terrorist groups. I understand the whole "checks and balances" system, but I was just wondering why congress decided not to go ahead with it. Especially after 9/11 when everyone was all for retaliation. I'm not saying "Go to war!" I was just asking why it has never reached that point where it was officially war. There are some good answers below though, thank you everyone.

Answer 1

we are, duh

Answer 2

Because we aren't at war with a definate nation or state. We are at war with "terrorism", which isn't really a physically entity and those that use terrorism.

Now, if your talking about Iraq, no, we aren't at war. It takes Congress to officially declare war, although they can grant the president the power to use military force for a specific purpose. Which is what Congress has done since the Vietnam War.

Answer 3

no one declares war anymore. there has not been an official declaration of war since wwII. declaration of war requires approval from congress. if the president doesn't think he can get approval he just goes ahead with a police action (like korea and vietnam) or with a military intervention. my guess is bush did not feel he could get an official declaration of war. i think it requires a 2/3 majority to grant the president war powers (i could be wrong on that). so bush decided to go ahead with his plans anyway. this way congress could not revoke the war powers. the only control congress has now is on spending for the war. and if they withhold any money they are deemed unpatriotic so really it's the perfect situation for bush. he has all power of a declaration without the inconvenience of being responsible to congress.

Answer 4

bush has the power now because congress turned their power over to him. instead of formal war declarations, the us congress has begun issuing authorizations of force. and the recent authorization of the use of military force (AUMF) resolution that started the war in iraq.

There are also diplomatic reasons for a dislike of "declaring war" on a country, as it can often be perceived as holding an entire nation responsible for the actions of a few of its citizens. In the case of the most recent public opposition, those who support such actions have noted that, in the case of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, there was no 'target' for a legal declaration of war, rather political groups or individuals. On the other hand, many argue that since an invading army seeks to, or at least actually does, occupy and cause havoc to a entire target country and its population (as opposed to the target political groups or individuals), the aforementioned justifications are tenuous at best.

Answer 5

Declaration of war against Al Qaeda was officially noted in the declaration by Congress to go into Afghanistan. Since we're still fighting Al Qaeda wherever they may be, then there's no reason to declare it again.

Answer 6

The fact that the US has never declared war on something that wasnt a country before. Its hard to describe excactly who we are at war with. BUT i'm pretty sure we are declared at war because the prez is using his "war time powers" (or at least i have heard that phrase used often). Anyway if we arnt its probably because if we say were in a war there geneva convention **** that might bog us down in getting terrorist info.

Answer 7

A formal declaration of war would require the senate to vote in favor. Calling it a "police" action, or getting the U.N. to ask for us to do soemthing is a loophole. Temporary presidential powers for military use ends at (if it's not changed since my high school govt. class) 90days. If it's "war" ole pres has to either get the nod from the house or get the troops out. If it's something other......

Answer 8

Black Sabbath is right. It is a war on terror.

That means every freak that wants to blow up a plane, put anthrax in your mail, release sarin on your train or salmonella on your salad bar, put a pipe bomb in your mailbox...

Given those examples, pick someone for Congress to declare war on! I just mentioned the exploits of Al Quaeda, a mystery agent, a Japanese terrorist organization, and a wacked out American college student acting alone.

Answer 9

Against what foreign government?

We would need to have a foreign government, with a recognized standing military force, before a declaration of war would be appropriate. There isn't one, because terrorist groups are generally not running the government, and where they are the US generally refused to recognize them as the valid leadership of the country.

Answer 10

The checks and balances system, I believe. One section may want to go to the war, but two or three have to agree in order for it to happen, and it hasn't. So it's just an invasion, though everyone calls it a war.

Answer 11

Wars are declared on nations. Since we are dealing with terrorists, whom belong to many nations (well, at least a couple), we are unable to make such a declaration. So we've made a fundamental declaration of war (i.e. hostilities) toward active antagonists of our nation.

That's how I figure it and I think that you can locate supporting information in the U.S. Constitution.