Posted on 08/22/2002 6:44:48 AM PDT by KLT
President Bush has sufficient legal authority to conduct a war against Iraq under broadly drafted resolutions that Congress passed in 1991 for the Persian Gulf War and a second resolution adopted last year for the war against al Qaeda, legal experts say.
Some add that the president's position would be strengthened politically by seeking a new congressional vote on any operations in Iraq, which would require a public debate over the evidence the administration has developed against Saddam Hussein, and a discussion about what the wider consequences of the war might be on the Middle East.
Lee Casey, a partner in the Washington law firm of Baker and Hostetler, said he would prefer a congressional debate to lead to a war declaration that clearly defines the conflict while asking America's allies to line themselves up as allies, neutrals or fellow belligerents.
But Casey said he cannot dispute the White House contention that Bush already has sufficient authority to conduct the war against Iraq under the resolutions Congress already has enacted.
"Yes, he does have the legal authority to go ahead," Casey said. But seeking another vote from Congress "politically makes a lot of sense - it makes a united country," Casey said. He said a vote of congressional support would also give Bush political cover if a war with Iraq turned sour.
Congress has declared war only five times - against Great Britain in 1812, Mexico in 1846, Spain in 1898 and then World War I and World War II.
In drafting the Constitution, the Founding Fathers gave Congress the power "to make war" but later changed the language "to declare war," but gave no further explanation of the debate, leaving to historians to debate why the change was made.
It has made little difference. War has raged on several occasions under resolutions or congressional authorizations of military funding that have fallen short of declarations of war.
Among these were an undeclared war with France from 1798-80, the First Barbary Pirate War of 1801-05, and the Second Barbary Pirate War of 1815, the raid of slave traffic in Africa from 1820-23, an action against Paraguay for attacking a U.S. ship in 1859, the invasion of Lebanon in 1958, the Vietnam War of 1964-73, and the Persian Gulf War of 1990-91. The U.S. Civil War was never declared because Union lawmakers after secession regarded the conflict as an "insurrection," or a rebellion. The Korean War was conducted under a United Nations resolution.
The Persian Gulf War was conducted under a 1991 congressional resolution that states "the president is authorized...to use United States armed forces pursuant to United Nations" resolutions that found Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait and Iraq's development of weapons of mass destruction threatened the peace and security of the region.
Congress has never repealed the resolution, and for the last decade, U.S. and British warplanes have enforced a no-fly zone over Iraqi territory because Saddam Hussein never lived up to a cease-fire agreement requiring him to comply with the U.N. resolutions.
President Bush has argued that the resolution Congress passed after the Sept. 11 attacks also gives him broad authority to conduct operations in Iraq.
That resolution, which Congress passed three days after the attack, is broadly drafted. It states:
"The president is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on Sept. 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons."
The administration has been building the case that the Iraqi dictator is connected with al Qaeda, contending that Iraq is harboring terrorist refugees and al Qaeda operatives.
A congressional resolution is not equivalent to a declaration of war, which is a peculiar legal action that has consequences of its own.
Stephen Salzburg, a George Washington University law professor, said a declaration of war gives the president broad emergency powers, and triggers about 150 provisions in the law, including the right to seize ships, impose censorship, expedite licensing for nuclear facilities, and control communications. It also affects contracts and insurance policies, which are written specifically to exclude coverage from damage caused by acts of war.
The powers of the White House are so broad, Abraham Lincoln suspended the habeas corpus rights of people to appeal their detention through the courts, and the Roosevelt administration rounded up Japanese-American citizens on the West Coast and put them in camps during World War II.
© Copyright 2002 by Capitol Hill Blue
AMEN!
This war hasn't been suddenly widened. Bush is just following through with what he announced right after 9-11. Why is that so hard for you to grasp?
The members of Al Qaeda are in the Kurdish-controlled section of Iraq.
Evidence?
FReegards...MUD
Did this book you referenced give an opinion on exactly how much FDR knew about Pearl Harbor prior to 12/7/41?
FReegards...MUD
Did you see or hear the Tom Delay speech yesterday? The linkages between the al queda and Iraq have been well-established, my Newbie FRiend...you need to FReep a bit more.
FReegards...MUD
Just out of curiousity, did we crash the party?
Since NONE of those freaking Peaceful Muslims have made any serious attempt to show remorse or action against the radicals within their "cult" -- I consider them all quilty until proven innocent...
Not PC - but smart from a self preservation aspect.
The ONLY thing that will convince those assholes to backoff - is to hurt them VERY badly.
Sudden and widespread destruction of valuable targets and sites - and people - may convince them they have attacked the wrong target.
If that fails -- an all out war until total defeat and unconditional surrender would be appropriate...
Semper Fi
What FDR did know for sure was that the Japs intended to invade South Asia, and would avoid taking on Russia, and that they were coordinating overall strategic moves with Germany, and that America would not be able to stay out of the war because Germany would declare war on America if Japan and America went to war. He knew this because the diplomatic traffic was the area of best analysis. The moves of the Jap fleet were another matter.
I still find it hard to believe FDR would do this, but it was mighty fortunate we had no carriers docked there on 12/7/41.
FReegards...MUD
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.