The Congress has power to fund the military and it has the power to formally declare a state of war between the United States and another sovereign state or states.
As others have pointed out, President Thomas Jefferson - who I assume was conversant with the Constitution - sent US forces into battle against the Pasha of Tripoli without any Congressional declaration of war.
Terrible analogy. The lieutenant colonel commanding a battalion is directly responsible to the colonel of his regiment. Even his title betrays the fact that he acts as a representative of the colonel and not on his own authority.
That's the chain of command.
The President of the United States is at the apex of the chain of command. He has no military superior like the lieutenant colonel of a battalion does.
He possesses plenary authority over the US armed forces, and can only be cashiered by impeachment.
The Congress has no authority to tell him what to do, just as he has no authority to order Congress to fund the military.
The Constitution was structured this way for a reason: one man has full military authority, enabling the US to act quickly and flexibly in situations that require military action, without the quibbling and delays that legislative debates engender.
The Congress checks him by denying him the funds he needs to supply the armed forces, not by telling him how or when to do his job.
You’re right. I had forgotten that the Presidency, where we used to have a President who “presides,” has become an office held by an Emperor, who has to answer to nobody.
Good point.