posted on Dec, 7 2004 @ 06:22 AM
Actually, it was my understanding that the clause is in the constitution, but just to be sure, I went and researched it....And boy, did I open open up
a big can of worms.
Without getting into lengthy details, suffice it to say that the power to declare war is STILL a hotly debated topic, with no clear answers. Some
interpret the war clauses to mean that the congress must approve of any war first, even though the President is given official control of the
military. Others would have it (and especially the Presidents themselves) that the President can use the military at will, and with impunity. Even in
the face of the War Powers Act, which seeks to limit the President's ability to use the military, the debate still remains.
After all the reading on the subject I just did (about 3 hours worth), I am firmly on the side that the original intent of the Constitution, given
it's nature to cautiously implement a fair system of checks and balances, meant that in order for the President to INITIATE unprovoked military
action, Congressional approval must first be sought. If we are attacked however, I think it would be fair in the interests of national security that
the President should be able to respond in kind, quickly, and without congressional approval. Definately the subject of another thread, which I may
start in the near future, unless any of you care to.
Look, listen, research, and learn. Me loves this place!