English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Do you think that presidents should have the right to go to war on their own, without seeking authorization from Congress?

2007-03-22 14:21:06 · 17 answers · asked by mj58 2 in Politics & Government Elections

17 answers

No. The Founders got it right.

It's one of the checks and balances. Congress authorizes the war, and the President handles the strategic decisions within the bounds set by Congress.

2007-03-22 14:27:13 · answer #1 · answered by coragryph 7 · 3 2

Many people quote the Constitution. The Constitution reads that only Congress has the power to declare war. However, no President has ever followed this rule, including George Washington. First they start the war then ask Congress for the power to wage the war, the money to proceed, Congress feels that it must allow the war to continue & so funds said war. They feel that they must go along because men/women have been sent into battle & must be equiped for fighting. To do otherwise would mean that troops would die & it would be the fault of Congress. This puts the Congress in a bad situation; either fund it or be blamed for the loss of lives of our service people. Congress should get off it's hands & demand the power given to it by the Constitution.

2007-03-22 21:48:52 · answer #2 · answered by geegee 6 · 1 0

If it takes 20 minutes for a nuclear missile to land on the US from the other side of the planet, how much time would you like to give the enemy before we responded? As it is, the President can declare war but must go to congress if hostilities are to last beyond sixty days.

2007-03-22 21:35:51 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

Sure, as long as they don't involve anyone else. Just strap on the weapons and go for it. Smile.
Joke. There has to be a commander in Chief who makes the decisions. There are many people involved and congress is involved. It's the deniers today who are causing the problems. You have to be all in one accord for the enemy to know you mean business. This same action in government is what lost the Vietnam war. ((Congress did authorize this war, by the way, It is just they are scared pups now and want to withdraw their marbles))
Hisemiester

2007-03-22 21:28:51 · answer #4 · answered by hisemiester 3 · 1 0

He can't declare war with out Congress...however..he can send in the Marine Corps and other Special Forces without authorization

2007-03-22 21:29:56 · answer #5 · answered by dacowbyway 1 · 1 1

No. That would eliminate the need for a tri-branched form of government, and this would be the Communist Dictatorship of AmeriKa. Our ancestors left England to be free of corrupt bloodline politics and to find their own religious freedom.

If the Dictator could declare war without ever clearing it through Congress, we'd be at war all the time, espcially when the Vice Dictator has significant financial interests in a certain oil pipeline .....

2007-03-22 21:25:53 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

If that was allowed then you would have anarchy. Tp much power for one person. That is why the United States has three branches of government, The United States Supreme Court, US Congress, and the President, a perfect check and balance. No let it remain the same.

2007-03-22 21:30:34 · answer #7 · answered by idak13 4 · 1 1

They don't, they require approval from Congress to go to war. Even President Bush sought out approval from Congress for the War on Terror and he got it with a majority from both Democrats and Republicans.

2007-03-22 21:25:56 · answer #8 · answered by meathookcook 6 · 2 1

They do and always have had that right in the US. The president is the commander and chief of the US military, and therefore when elected is given that right. If we are under attack, or something needs to be done the president can't be bogged down by paperwork and rediculous partisan bickering,or we would be over run by our foes.

2007-03-22 21:27:49 · answer #9 · answered by nicole 3 · 2 0

Its all up to Congress they give the Presidents the money to wage wars. But no I don't think undeclared wars should be allowed

2007-03-22 21:25:47 · answer #10 · answered by Samantha 6 · 2 1

fedest.com, questions and answers