Does Congress have the right to stop a President from waging war?

Question

PLEASE SUPPORT YOUR ANSWER.

Answer 1

They not only have the right,they have the obligation to do all they can to stop a president from waging a war that congress sees that is not in the best intrest of the country,after trying all they can in preventing him from going to war and he still wants to rage war then articles of impeachment would be next!

Answer 2

Yes. Congress is the only governing body with the authority to declare war. That being said, they are consequently fully within their rights if they decide to stop allowing the war to continue. They pull the funding, stop allowing troops to be sent, and any number of things, even come right out and say this is over, you are done. Unfortunately, everyone in congress regardless of their political affiliation has turned into weak minded vote pandering lily-livered suck-ups with no sense of pride desperately pulling for the approval or friendly response from everyone they haven't insulted yet. In the absence of clear-cut concrete decisions and competent independent minded law-makers, everything that has been on a roll will continue to occur and progress. Since they're all too cowardly to act on their so-called moral convictions that they shamelessly flaunt every time there's a camera or magazine reporter present, nothing will get done.
So in closing I'd like to point out that yes they have the authority to stop the president from waging war, but at this point in time they lack the pro-active mind set to go ahead and do something about all the hot air they blow, and they lack the capacity to realize the powers they wield instead of hiding behind some irrelevant and idiotic excuse to continue cowering in the shadow of an imbecilic president and posse of cronies.

Answer 3

Read the Constitution. Only Congress has the power to declare war, it's the president's job as commander in chief to wage them. Resolutions mean bupkus. The Executive has taken power that is not authorized to it, and the wimpy Congress has not done it's job of keeping the balance of power, and oversight.

Answer 4

A President must first get the approval from congress, without it, no war. Congress voted to support the President in this one. Idiots.

Answer 5

Rather than pass some meaningless resolution, Congress COULD pass a law preventing Bush from using nuclear weapons on non-Nuclear countries. This would stop Bush's ambition to attack Iran dead in its track. AND, since the ONLY reason we're still in Iraq is so that BushCo. can prepare phony provocation (WMD-like) to attack Iran, taking an Iran attack off the table would essentially end the so called "war" in Iraq.

Answer 6

Yes! The liberals whine and speak out against the war yet keep okaying money to fund it! Then they pass a nonbinding resolution against it, which simply means they are on record for opposing the war yet won't do anything to stop it! These liberals are so full of themselves and worried about attaing their power and trying so hard to convince the rest of the US that they are the better choice. Which they aren't!

Answer 7

Congress can declare war and appropriate funds for the war.
The Commander in Chief has sole power to execute the war.

Answer 8

I don't think they can. They can pass resolutions to denounce the war or the Presidents handling of the war. They might be able to put a stop to it by cutting off the money, but that would be political suicide. I think that as Commander-in-Chief he has the authority to wage war.

Answer 9

Yes, they do have that right. They can do it by cutting off the funding like they did during the Viet Nam war. Bush may be commander and chief but he's not a monarch and still has to answer to congress.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/01/11/iraq.congress/index.html
http://hnn.us/articles/31400.html

And they could do it if they passed H.R. 508

http://www.pdamerica.org/articles/news/2007-01-17-22-20-47-news.php

Answer 10

Yes. By not forfeiting their responsibility to declare war in the first place.