If the U.S. Constitution is bestowed upon to have the power to:?

Question

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;


1. Why did Bush get to declare war on Iraq?
2. And, why is there even a Guantanamo ******* Prison, if Congress hasn't authorized it?


Or is it:
1. Bush didn't "really" declare war on Iraq...Or Afghanistan for that matter.
2. Congress did authorize Guantanamo Bay, for the purpose of a place for captives?

Thanks all...All good answers.


I kind of figured the Constitution didn't really mean much anyway. So thanks for verifying for me that it can change without ratification of the states.


I particularily like how "military action" isn't defined as war....Even tho it is defined as "war". Funny...Not only is the Constitution a god damned piece of paper, so is the dictionary....


And now Congress doesn't even need approval in redefining our language.


So thanks, all.

Answer 1

To answer your questions:

1. President Bush didn't declare war on Iraq. Persuant to the War Powers Act of 1973, President Bush asked for Congressional authorization to send troops to Iraq, and Congress approved the request.

2. Congress does not manage the day to day affairs of the military. That is the President's job as Commander in Chief. But Congress approves the budget for Gitmo every year, and if they wanted the detainment facility closed all they have to do is refuse to fund it.

Answer 2

No war has been declared by the US Congress since December, 1941.

However, Congress did authorize military action in Afghanistan and Iraq.

As for the PW Camp at Gitmo, it is better than tossing the prisoners in a general prison. Of course I have grave doubts about the wisdom of taking prisoners in this war against Terrorism. We've all seen what the terrorists do to American soldiers and civilians that fall into their hands. I strongly favor a no prisoners policy when engaged in counter-terrorist campaigns.

Answer 3

The war powers act of 1973. It's a shady little law that congress passed giving the president limited power to wage war without declaring it. Congress didn't like the idea that in a declared war the president has far more power then they do. SO they fixed it. The president can go to war but its never formally declared so he never has the full powers of commander and chief.
Sounds unconstitutional but since it never makes it to the Supreme Court no one can rule it that way.
Thats the simplified answer.

Forgot to address GITMO. That one is more shady. The prisoners there are classed as enemy combatants. They are not civilian prisoners entitled to rights under law. They are not military prisoners of war entitled to rights under treaty. They are in a strange classification with no rights or protections but what we grant.

Answer 4

Its a way of validating the rights and powers we invented. Since natural and inherent rights have been invalidated by empirical evidence and reasoning, it falls to a divine being to grant these rights. Otherwise we just have to accept the reality that they were invented by man. Edit: You may to an extent.. I guess the line becomes blurred when you argue that because SOME behaviour is criminalized in virtually every society that means there must be some form of moral universalism. However, it is possible that murder for example is a universal crime simply because it is conducive to the good order of any society. If people feared being killed arbitrarily then it would be detrimental to good order. So arguably these universal codes of conduct probably evolved with the evolution of society rather than as a reflection of some universal moral truths. If that all makes sense :-)