4 ms·
There is no requirement, either under the Constitution or under laws of war, for any sort of formal declaration. And, there as an "authorization of military for
by rhino369 13y ago
There is no requirement, either under the Constitution or under laws of war, for any sort of formal declaration. And, there as an "authorization of military force" against al Qaeda and the Taliban. There certainly isn't some magic I DECLARE WAR requirement.
> Why hasn't the US Congress declared war since WW2? Is there some consequence to declaring war or not declaring war that they're trying to avoid?
Its an outdated concept.
- bediger4000 13y agoI seem to recall that we've got laws that make some crimes have a greater penalty during "time of war", which I assume means declared war. How do you mean "outdated concept"? Are there no more wars? Are their no different legal penalties or obligations during war any more? Because I'm told that the USA has been in wars since 2001 at least. What are the consequences to me, and to my government of outdating an official declaration of war?
- betterunix 13y agoOh, so we are at war with a government that has been completely disbanded and a loose network of terrorists whose leaders are either dead or imprisoned. Next you'll be telling me that we are at war with Germany, Japan, and Italy.
- dllthomas 13y ago"There is no requirement, either under the Constitution or under laws of war, for any sort of formal declaration." Given that the constitution explicitly gives congress "the power to declare war", I'm not sure this is entirely reasonable. That said, I don't think it's unreasonable to say the AUMF count, either.