This sentence makes me think that Congressman Paul has a dubious grip on history. Undeclared wars are and have always been the rule, not the exception.
Too bad that earlier generations of Congresscritters allowed an imperial Presidency to come into being, starting with Lincoln.
I am not a conservative as much as a reactionary : a conservative is simply one who wants no more change, whereas a reactionary would like to turn back to earlier ways.
Being a strict Constitutionalist is not very popular with conservatives or liberals.
My question to Mr. Paul is this: Where does the Constitution require a declaration of war? It provides for Congress to declare war, but I don't see where it requires the Executive to get a declaration. And apparantly, most other folks don't see it either. Someone show me where I am wrong.