They have the Constitutional duty to protect us, and the Commander in Chief is acting within his Constitutional authority.
btw, it is the Iraqis who are creating their own democracy (although here again, you are in perfect alignment with leftists if you see us as Imperialist occupiers imposing democracy on the poor Iraqis who just wanted to be left alone and brutalized by Saddam.....), and we are protecting them while they build it.
You, once again, see only one half of the equation, and presume your own views on what the Founders would have done.
I make my choice gladly that President Washington, if faced with the same decision about how to protect American citizens against attacks on our soil, would have made the same choice as the 43rd President has made.
Ah, so now we're striking those who are plotting. Mind you they haven't acted but they're 'plotting'. Pre-emptive strikes were not the standard in the past. I could discuss the concept of 'just war' with you but I think you would ignore it in your support of Republican talking points (that's not an insult, just an observation). By your argument, we may as well attack China and half of Africa next year as I imagine they're 'plotting' too...
As for citizens traveling abroad, you're using the one of the same arguments Wilson used to help get us into WWI. You travel outside the borders of this nation of states, you have made a willful choice to remove yourself from protection by the Armed Forces. Wilson's view was wrong then and it's still wrong today
you believe that the President and the Congress do not have the Constitutional power to 'define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations?' (remember that the Congress approved the military action against the regime of Iraq, well within their Constitutional bounds).
Please provide the declaration of war as passed by Congress. Not an open-ended passage of power to the President but one that specifically named the enemy and the scope of the war. The only possible foe in this 'war' would have been Afghanistan, whose 'democracy' BTW you don't hear a lot about lately (wonder why that is....)
Also considering the administration has dropped the 'war on terror' phrase in place of GSAVE, the administration has all but admitted this was not an official war as outlined in Article I, Section 8. Contrary to Republican talking points, the purpose of war as seen by the Framers (again according to their words) was defense only, not 'spreading democracy', not focusing on violence in other nations, not pie in the sky ideals, but defense of the borders of this nation of states
btw, it is the Iraqis who are creating their own democracy (although here again, you are in perfect alignment with leftists if you see us as Imperialist occupiers imposing democracy on the poor Iraqis who just wanted to be left alone and brutalized by Saddam.....), and we are protecting them while they build it.
The Iraqis could only have began to create a democracy (although our own Framers warned against democracies) after the removal of Hussein. In effect, our actions directly brought about the change. Something the Framers again would not have desired. And you would be hard pressed to find an argument for our intervention to help in any form for establishment of a republic anywhere in the world.
You, once again, see only one half of the equation, and presume your own views on what the Founders would have done.
No, not my 'own views' but their own words