What are some examples of presidents increasing their war-making powers?

Answer 1

First the background

1) The president himself, he is assigned only two powers relating to foreign affairs: he is commander-in-chief of the armed forces, and he has the power to receive ambassadors.

2) According to John Bassett Moore, the great authority on international law who (among other credentials) occupied the first professorship of international law at Columbia University, "There can hardly be room for doubt that the framers of the constitution, when they vested in Congress the power to declare war, never imagined that they were leaving it to the executive to use the military and naval forces of the United States all over the world for the purpose of actually coercing other nations, occupying their territory, and killing their soldiers and citizens, all according to his own notions of the fitness of things, as long as he refrained from calling his action war or persisted in calling it peace."

3)However,,,things changed after WW2 - Ever since the Korean War, Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution – which refers to the president as the "Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States" – has been interpreted to mean that the president may act with an essentially free hand in foreign affairs, or at the very least that he may send men into battle without consulting Congress.

4)There are many expansion of war powers that precede this - Cornell University’s Walter LaFeber pinpoints the origins of modern presidential war powers in an obscure incident from 1900. In 1898 a group of anti-foreign Chinese fighters known to the West as the Boxers rose up in protest against foreign exploitation and extraterritorial privileges in their country. They targeted Christian missionaries and Chinese converts, as well as French and Belgian engineers. After the German minister was killed in 1900, several nations sent troops to restore order amid the growing terror. McKinley contributed 5,000 American troops. This apparently minor action, however, was pregnant with consequences, as LaFeber observes:

McKinley took a historic step in creating a new, twentieth-century presidential power. He dispatched the five thousand troops without consulting Congress, let alone obtaining a declaration of war, to fight the Boxers who were supported by the Chinese government…. Presidents had previously used such force against non-governmental groups that threatened U.S. interests and citizens. It was now used, however, against recognized governments, and without obeying the Constitution’s provisions about who was to declare war.

5)However - Now what of those "hundreds" of cases of presidential warmaking? This argument – surprise – originated with the U.S. government itself. At the time of the Korean War, a number of congressmen contended that "history will show that on more than 100 occasions in the life of this Republic the President as Commander in Chief has ordered the fleet or the troops to do certain things which involved the risk of war" without the consent of Congress. In 1966, in defense of the Vietnam War, the State Department adopted a similar line: "Since the Constitution was adopted there have been at least 125 instances in which the President has ordered the armed forces to take action or maintain positions abroad without obtaining prior congressional authorization, starting with the ‘undeclared war’ with France (1798–1800)."

6) Or consider Lincolns belief - Allow the President to invade a neighboring nation, whenever he shall deem it necessary to repel an invasion, and you allow him to do so, whenever he may choose to say he deems it necessary for such purpose – and you allow him to make war at pleasure…. Study to see if you can fix any limit to his power in this respect, after you have given him so much as you propose. If, to-day, he should choose to say he thinks it necessary to invade Canada, to prevent the British from invading us, how could you stop him? You may say to him, "I see no probability of the British invading us" but he will say to you "be silent; I see it, if you don’t."

The provision of the Constitution giving the war-making power to Congress, was dictated, as I understand it, by the following reasons. Kings had always been involving and impoverishing their people in wars, pretending generally, if not always, that the good of the people was the object. This, our Convention understood to be the most oppressive of all Kingly oppressions; and they resolved to so frame the Constitution that no one man should hold the power of bringing this oppression upon us. But your view destroys the whole matter, and places our President where kings have always stood.

Lastly consider this - the words of Senator Robert A. Taft in 1951: "My conclusion, therefore, is that in the case of Korea, where a war was already under way, we had no right to send troops to a nation, with whom we had no treaty, to defend it against attack by another nation, no matter how unprincipled that aggression might be, unless the whole matter was submitted to Congress and a declaration of war or some other direct authority obtained."


In the end - the president gets away with whatever the congress tolerates - simple.

Answer 2

Well they did not ban me this time...however it seems that I have got to give up announcing anything is on my brain in any other case I will now not have any privileges right here. Apparently my IMPLIED profanity violated group specifications and my publish was once too chatty and/or a rant. Maybe I did use a few implied profanity, sorry approximately that. But it was once "bleeped" out through my possess hand for probably the most facet. My opinion nevertheless is my industry and in the event that they (Y/a or liberals) do not agree or do not adore it....they may be able to chunk me. I had at least nine questions and/or solutions deleted with aspects taken for violations for speakme my brain this week. I truthfully had terrible aspects for so much of this week. ha ha in spite of a couple of "great" solutions. LEV...you realize wherein I stand brother. Give 'em hell Spike. I truthfully watched a man on msnbc in these days apologizing to and justifying the pirates and their crook habits. I anticipate Obama will probably be doing the equal earlier than lengthy. Right now he does not also have the heart to mention or do some thing. The global has been killing each and every different eternally...however NOW it is all our fault. Only factor I'm ashamed of is Obaa-maa the pinnacle scapegoat and the liberal sheep who blindly comply with him. He's extra involved approximately dog puppies and pizza than American hostages. What approximately the American journalist in Iran with the intention to unavoidably be completed. What has he performed or mentioned approximately HER?

Answer 3

Presidents don't have the power to declare war...only congress does.

Answer 4

Bush...with the aid of a rubber stamp congress.