Why should US Presidents declare war?

Question

Starting with Viet Nam, US Presidents have been allowed to declare war without approval of the House of Representatives. Thomas Jefferson gave the House of Representatives that power, consciously, to check the balance of power from an over-zealous President. We the people fight these wars, not the President's family. Shouldn't we demand representation on this issue?

I misspoke..I said declare war and LBJ did NOT declare war..if he had the House of Representatives would have had to ratify it...that's exactly the problem!!!

Answer 1

First of all,war was not declaired in Vietnam.We were the allies & were asked to help!
Second of all,no US president can declair war & send anyone to fight without the agreement of congress & all others involved.
I bekieve that these folks bekieve like I do!The president was right,because if we sit back & take their BS,then they gain power over our will as well as our country.
How many of you will run & cower when we are threated again on our own soil?As for me,I will pick up my nearest gun,stick,nail gun,drill,basebal bat,or what ever I can get my hands on & start kicking butt until I die!

Answer 2

It is a very poor system. It should be done as before. That is too much power for a person. The Congress should do it again as it used to be. It is better to use the know how and experience of a large group of persons which have knowledge in many fields. It will be less likely that the wrong decision could be taken. That is what the Congress is get paid for.

Answer 3

I have to clarify something for you: The President does not declare war. The President can request a declaration of war, then the House can fulfill or deny the request if it sees fit. But the declaration falls on the House.

Answer 4

Presidents do not have the power to declare war. Only Congress has the power to declare war.

Answer 5

certainly that's no longer what the form says. The President does no longer declare conflict - purely Congress can. So the final stable assertion of conflict by Congress exchange into on Jun 5 1942 against Bulgaria, Hungary and Romania. yet for the reason that then Congress have approved protection rigidity pastime with no assertion of conflict in Lebanon in 1958, Vietnam in 1964, Lebanon in 1983, Grenada in 1983, Kuwait in 1991, Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq in 2003 (jointly as protection rigidity action exchange into approved, the invasion, profession and regime exchange exchange into no longer). And US troops have been utilized in UN risk-free practices Council movements, backed by UN risk-free practices Council Resolutions in Korea in 1950, Lebanon in 1978, Bosnia in the Nineteen Nineties, Liberia in 2003 and Haiti in 2004. yet your question seems to intend that presidents would have "declared conflict" without approval from congress. That has in no way occurred yet Presidents have used the U. S. protection rigidity without previous authorization from Congress or the UN risk-free practices Council on many occassions consisting of the u . s .-Philippino conflict from 1898-1903 wherein a million/2 a million Philippinos have been killed, the 1840-1886 conflict against the Apache u . s . a . just to call the main important 2.

Answer 6

U.S. Presidents do not declare war; the Congress declares war. The Congress needs to step up and do its job - which may include impeachment of a president who has abused his power as Commander-in-Chief.

Answer 7

Foreign policy traditionally was the decision of the executive and not the legislature. In the UK, the power of the king to make treaties and declare war was the last of the powers he lost.

If one person can decide their country's foreign policy it makes it alot more coherent. Congress can't attend conferences, can't consult with allies, and can't conduct diplomacy, this is why it makes sense for presidents to be final arbiter for foreign policy.

Answer 8

You are correct. Congress has abdicated it's responsiblity. Both of those wars were unconstitutional.

Answer 9

YES yes and yes