Was there a Congressional Declaration of War on the Barbary Pirates? ( Maybe not!)

Various ^ | Nov. 20, 2001 | Self

[Texasforever]

Test

[Free the USA]

Bump so that I can read the comments latter.

[Texasforever]

Ping.

[Texasforever]

Ping

[MadameAxe]

Interesting; thanks.

[MindBender26]

In December, 1941, a few days after Pearl Harbor, in his famous "Day of Infamy" speech, President Rosevelt said "I ask that the Congress declare that since the unprovoked and dastardly attack by Japan on Sunday, Dec. 7, a state of war has existed between the United States and the Japanese empire."

Notice that he did say that war would exist from that time forward, but rather that war had existed, without any declaration. since the attack by the enemy.

Congress took "judicial notice" of the event, but the war was "legally" operational from all times after the attack by the enemy. In addition, since Al Queda has declared war on us, and attacked, all action by Congress is moot.

[TomGuy]

Additionally,
Enemy Country.--It has seemed reasonably clear that the Constitution does not follow the advancing troops into conquered territory. Persons in such territory have been held entirely beyond the reach of constitutional limitations and subject to the laws of war as interpreted and applied by the Congress and the President.1534 ''What is the law which governs an army invading an enemy's country?'' the Court asked in Dow v. Johnson.1535 ''It is not the civil law of the invaded country; it is not the civil law of the conquering country; it is military law--the law of war--and its supremacy for the protection of the officers and soldiers of the army, when in service in the field in the enemy's country, is as essential to the efficiency of the army as the supremacy of the civil law at home, and, in time of peace, is essential to the preservation of liberty.''

The link in #1 is an interesting read.

[SunStar]

BTTT

Thanks for the great research. It looks like the Bush Administration did their own research on the subject and came up with the same results as you.

[MindBender26]

You have started a great, important and learned thread.

[Texasforever]

I hope we can put the "Bush is wrong because war was not declared" behind us, I don't hlod much hope though.

[Texasforever]

I hope it can at least put one incorrect assumption to rest.

[toenail]

bump for later

[MindBender26]

With the assistance of Mr. Rosevelt and Mr. Jefferson, should not be too difficult.......

[jwalsh07]

Good job Tex, I'm goign a couple of rounds with NAFV over this declaration of war thing.

[okie01]

Thanks for the research.

And a bump for the rest...

[Free Vulcan]

Bttt

[okie01]

"It looks like the Bush Administration did their own research on the subject and came up with the same results as you."

The media, however, can't be bothered with doing their own research.

Especially as the DNC is happy to do it for them...

[budwiesest]

During a home invasion I would hardly think it reasonable to seek consensus from the other inhabitants before reacting in self defense.

Though the time frames may seem different (two months vs. two minutes) they really are not. Not with anthrax, botulism, suitcase nukes, turbo small pox, etc. hanging over our heads. At this point the 'invasion' remains very much in progress and defensive measures, whatever they may be, may be warranted.

At this stage we may have to wait to determine if the use of 'deadly force' was justified. Still too early IMO.

[Texasforever]

At this stage we may have to wait to determine if the use of 'deadly force' was justified

I'm not sure what that statement meant.