2006-08-29 10:06:11 · 22 answers · asked by Lleh 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
No.
Congress issued an Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF), which under the War Powers Act of 1973 gave the president the authority to send troops over.
It is legally distinct from a Declaration of War, and does not convey the same legal status or have the same effect on other laws.
{EDIT to gdm} Would be kind enough to give the Public Law citation, or the Senate bill number to back up your claim?
2006-08-29 10:10:39 · answer #1 · answered by coragryph 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sigh, so little time, so much to teach. A state of war was not declared by congress though it really should have been. The Terrorists declared war on us (actually over and over again), Iraq was shooting missiles at our planes, Afghanistan was harboring terrorists. Part of the problem is that many of the laws governing war assume a country has attacked this country (such as Japan) so they have little relevance when dealing with terrorists who are a few from column A and a few from column B. Iraq is a totally different situation. We defended an invaded country first go around and than we enforced a UN resolution, both completely legal.
2006-08-29 10:23:40 · answer #2 · answered by Colorado 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No. Not in the way it should be done. According to the Constitution, only the Congress has the right to declare war, not the president. But what happened in Iraq was, the Prez asked Congress for an authorization to use force, and they went along, & said OK. Very much like when the Congress authorized Harry Truman to conduct a "police action" in Korea, in support of the United Nations. But neithe one was an honest and up-front declaration of war by the gutless Congress.
2006-08-29 10:15:41 · answer #3 · answered by yahoohoo 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, Congress only authorized the President to use force. There was no formal Declaration of War. If there were, the War Powers Act would be in effect and all this surveillance and incarceration without trial stuff would be perfectly legal.
2006-08-29 10:13:21 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
They did for a short amount of time, I don't even believe it was for 6 months. But now we are not in an officially declared war.
2006-08-29 10:08:56 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
No, the Senate authorized the invasion, but did not legally/officially declare war.
2006-08-29 10:12:27 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No.
Nobody has officially declared war on anybody since Korea.
2006-08-29 22:58:43 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. It is a military action.
""Many times, the United States has engaged in extended military engagements that, while not formally declared wars, were explicitly authorized by Congress, short of a formal declaration of war.""
2006-08-29 10:12:51 · answer #8 · answered by oohhbother 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes back when Bush 1 was in office, Iraq actually broke the resolution to end the war among other things so we just started back up.
2006-08-29 10:12:59 · answer #9 · answered by jasonzbtzl 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
world war 2 was the last time the USA declared war on anyone.
the only time we would declare war again is for another full on world war.
that would be bad news.
2006-08-29 10:14:26 · answer #10 · answered by outbaksean 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋