Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Destro; Celtman
I guess it depends on what the meaning of "is" is. Maybe I'm reading the phrases "authorization to use the Armed Forces of the United States" and "War Powers" too broadly.

This is from the actual legislation:

SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

(a) AUTHORIZATION- The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to--

(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and

(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.

(b) PRESIDENTIAL DETERMINATION- In connection with the exercise of the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President shall, prior to such exercise or as soon thereafter as may be feasible, but no later than 48 hours after exercising such authority, make available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate his determination that--

(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq; and

(2) acting pursuant to this joint resolution is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorist and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.

(c) War Powers Resolution Requirements-

(1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION- Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution.

(2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS- Nothing in this joint resolution supersedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution.

The "whereas's" are here.

46 posted on 03/02/2005 1:13:57 PM PST by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]


To: <1/1,000,000th%
I guess it depends on what the meaning of "is" is.

      The question is whether an "Authorization for Use of Military Force" constitutes a declaration of war.  My answer is no.  It's not a new question.  The Korean "Police Action" had all of the trappings of a war, except for a declaration of war - and it has not ended, it's just suspended by an armistice.  Was the invasion of Iraq autuorized by an act of Congress?  Yes.  Was that Act authorized by the Constitution?  No.  Does it matter?  Yes.
66 posted on 03/02/2005 7:10:12 PM PST by Celtman (It's never right to do wrong to do right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson