7 ms·

I imagine it looks like this: JOINT RESOLUTION Resolved by the Senate and the House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled:

I imagine it looks like this: JOINT RESOLUTION Resolved by the Senate and the House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled: Declaring that a state of war exists between the armed militant groups of Jundallah, Tehrik-i-Taliban, Lashkar-e-Islam, TNSM, al-Qaeda, ISIL and their successor and fraternal organizations within Waziristan and neighboring provinces and the Government and people of the United States, and making provision to prosecute the same. Whereas, the recent acts of by the militant groups are acts of war against the Government and the people of the United States: Resolved by the Senate and the House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the state of War between the United States and the militant groups of Waziristan which has been thrust upon the United States is hereby formally declared; and That the President be, and is hereby, authorized and directed to take immediate steps not only to put the country in a thorough state of defense but also to exert all of its power and employ all of its resources to carry on war against the militant groups and to bring the conflict to a successful termination. ------------------- And then they vote on it and it passes. And the Supreme Court finds that there is nothing unconstitutional about it.

jacquesm 8y ago
By definition you can not declare war on something not another country because you will be attacking the country those people are in. Armed militant groups are first and foremost the problem of the countries bordering and including the territory these militants operate in. Any action against them by foreigners not otherwise involved in the region is an act of war in and of itself. Imagine - I know this is a tricky one - Russia intervening in North Dakota between two rival bike gangs. The United States would see this as an act of war against the USA, and rightly so. The only way this could happen is if there was a direct invitation from one of the governments of the affected countries and this would then still be limited to the territory of that country.
- freddie_mercury 8y ago
  > By definition you can not declare war on something not another country So the American Civil War wasn't a war, since the south wasn't another country? The Chinese civil war wasn't a war? The Iruqois Wars weren't wars? The Seljuk-Crusader War wasn't a real war? The War of the Sicilian Vespers wasn't a real war? The War of the Succession of Champange wasn't a real war? It seems like there's about 4,000+ years of natural language clearly establishing that a war is NOT just about fights between two nation states. But, hey, I could be wrong. It wouldn't be the first time Congress has passed a resolution that ended up being found unconstitutional and it won't be the last.
  - jacquesm 8y ago
    > So the American Civil War wasn't a war, since the south wasn't another country? No, it was a Civil War. As you already wrote. > The Chinese civil war wasn't a war? No. > The Iruqois Wars weren't wars? You are really reaching now. It seems to me that you are trying very hard to hold on to the idea that there is such a thing as a 'war on terrorism' but the whole thing is nonsense, just as much as the 'war on drugs' or any other mis-use of the term. > But, hey, I could be wrong. Yes you are. > It wouldn't be the first time Congress has passed a resolution that ended up being found unconstitutional and it won't be the last. It's not the constitution of the United States that matters here but international law. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_war https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_war
    - cglace 8y ago
      It's hard to say the CSA was not a country. They had land, currency, bonds, postage stamps, a government, an army, and a constitution.
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  > By definition you can not declare war on something not another country because you will be attacking the country those people are in. Declarations of war identify an enemy, they don't (inherently, though they could also do this) limit the geographic area in which forces of that enemy will be attacked. > Imagine - I know this is a tricky one - Russia intervening in North Dakota between two rival bike gangs. The United States would see this as an act of war against the USA, and rightly so. Yes, but that doesn't make declaring (or prosecuting) war against non-state actors impossible, it just means that prosecuting such a war will either require cooperation of or conflict with other states. That's often true with regard to third-party states in interstate war, too, whose territory is often violated (or, in some cases, the entire country occupied, as the British did to Iceland in WWII) without declaration of war as part of prosecuting a declared war against some other state.

jacquesm 8y ago

By definition you can not declare war on something not another country because you will be attacking the country those people are in. Armed militant groups are first and foremost the problem of the countries bordering and including the territory these militants operate in. Any action against them by foreigners not otherwise involved in the region is an act of war in and of itself. Imagine - I know this is a tricky one - Russia intervening in North Dakota between two rival bike gangs. The United States would see this as an act of war against the USA, and rightly so. The only way this could happen is if there was a direct invitation from one of the governments of the affected countries and this would then still be limited to the territory of that country.

freddie_mercury 8y ago
> By definition you can not declare war on something not another country So the American Civil War wasn't a war, since the south wasn't another country? The Chinese civil war wasn't a war? The Iruqois Wars weren't wars? The Seljuk-Crusader War wasn't a real war? The War of the Sicilian Vespers wasn't a real war? The War of the Succession of Champange wasn't a real war? It seems like there's about 4,000+ years of natural language clearly establishing that a war is NOT just about fights between two nation states. But, hey, I could be wrong. It wouldn't be the first time Congress has passed a resolution that ended up being found unconstitutional and it won't be the last.
- jacquesm 8y ago
  > So the American Civil War wasn't a war, since the south wasn't another country? No, it was a Civil War. As you already wrote. > The Chinese civil war wasn't a war? No. > The Iruqois Wars weren't wars? You are really reaching now. It seems to me that you are trying very hard to hold on to the idea that there is such a thing as a 'war on terrorism' but the whole thing is nonsense, just as much as the 'war on drugs' or any other mis-use of the term. > But, hey, I could be wrong. Yes you are. > It wouldn't be the first time Congress has passed a resolution that ended up being found unconstitutional and it won't be the last. It's not the constitution of the United States that matters here but international law. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_war https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_war
  - cglace 8y ago
    It's hard to say the CSA was not a country. They had land, currency, bonds, postage stamps, a government, an army, and a constitution.
dragonwriter 8y ago
> By definition you can not declare war on something not another country because you will be attacking the country those people are in. Declarations of war identify an enemy, they don't (inherently, though they could also do this) limit the geographic area in which forces of that enemy will be attacked. > Imagine - I know this is a tricky one - Russia intervening in North Dakota between two rival bike gangs. The United States would see this as an act of war against the USA, and rightly so. Yes, but that doesn't make declaring (or prosecuting) war against non-state actors impossible, it just means that prosecuting such a war will either require cooperation of or conflict with other states. That's often true with regard to third-party states in interstate war, too, whose territory is often violated (or, in some cases, the entire country occupied, as the British did to Iceland in WWII) without declaration of war as part of prosecuting a declared war against some other state.