4 ms·

I'm not really sure what the difference is between a declaration of war and an authorization of war, but we've had congressional authorization for a couple conf

I'm not really sure what the difference is between a declaration of war and an authorization of war, but we've had congressional authorization for a couple conflicts since then. I would argue that if Congress voted on it in the affirmative, it's not really a secret or stealthy war.

somesortofsystm 5y ago
A declaration of war means that the government has to answer to the people for its war crimes, per international legal standards. An authorization for war means that war crimes can be committed and war criminals can get away with it, because there is no legal basis for defining that war, except for what Politician-de-jour says it is.
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > A declaration of war means that the government has to answer to the people for its war crimes, per international legal standards. No, it doesn’t. A declaration of war has no effect at all on liability in international law. War criminals are responsible under international law whether or not war has been declared; the establishment of universal personal accountability of war criminals, including heads of state, for war crimes -- first unambiguously declared in the Nuremberg Principles -- declarations of war (which previously gave a veil of legitimacy to non-defensive war) have been pretty much irrelevant since non-defensive war was unambiguously itself declared to be a crime against peace. > An authorization for war means that war crimes can be committed and war criminals can get away with it, No, it doesn’t. > because there is no legal basis for defining that war, except for what Politician-de-jour says it is. Formal declarations of war and war authorizations have no difference in either international or, to the extent the latter is a recognized thing, most national laws in terms of what legal basis there is for defining the parameters of the war, and whatever difference in effect they might have under the terms of local law has no bearing on liability under international law.of those engaging in war crimes, crimes against peace, or crimes against humanity.
Taniwha 5y ago
The constitution only provides for declarations of war, and requires that the congress (not the president) declare war
- darksaints 5y ago
  The war powers act has been around for 50 years now, and the supreme court has not invalidated it yet. I think it's safe to say that they believe it is constitutional. Regardless, even if you believe that authorization for use of force is unconstitutional, that does not make it secret. Only Bill Clinton's engagement in Bosnia/Kosovo could be considered a secret war... The others were done with full authorization of Congress.

somesortofsystm 5y ago

A declaration of war means that the government has to answer to the people for its war crimes, per international legal standards. An authorization for war means that war crimes can be committed and war criminals can get away with it, because there is no legal basis for defining that war, except for what Politician-de-jour says it is.

dragonwriter 5y ago
> A declaration of war means that the government has to answer to the people for its war crimes, per international legal standards. No, it doesn’t. A declaration of war has no effect at all on liability in international law. War criminals are responsible under international law whether or not war has been declared; the establishment of universal personal accountability of war criminals, including heads of state, for war crimes -- first unambiguously declared in the Nuremberg Principles -- declarations of war (which previously gave a veil of legitimacy to non-defensive war) have been pretty much irrelevant since non-defensive war was unambiguously itself declared to be a crime against peace. > An authorization for war means that war crimes can be committed and war criminals can get away with it, No, it doesn’t. > because there is no legal basis for defining that war, except for what Politician-de-jour says it is. Formal declarations of war and war authorizations have no difference in either international or, to the extent the latter is a recognized thing, most national laws in terms of what legal basis there is for defining the parameters of the war, and whatever difference in effect they might have under the terms of local law has no bearing on liability under international law.of those engaging in war crimes, crimes against peace, or crimes against humanity.

Taniwha 5y ago

The constitution only provides for declarations of war, and requires that the congress (not the president) declare war

darksaints 5y ago
The war powers act has been around for 50 years now, and the supreme court has not invalidated it yet. I think it's safe to say that they believe it is constitutional. Regardless, even if you believe that authorization for use of force is unconstitutional, that does not make it secret. Only Bill Clinton's engagement in Bosnia/Kosovo could be considered a secret war... The others were done with full authorization of Congress.