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.
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.
And a bump for the rest...
Looks like the Bush team knows history a lot better than their detractors. After all, that was GWB's area of study as an undergrad, lol...
-penny
Very impressive researching!
Thus, would it not be appropriate for the president to ask Congress to declare that a state of war has existed between the United States and Al Qaeda since September 11, similar to Roosevelt?
From your post: "declared war upon the United States, and a debate began whether Congress had to enact a formal declaration of war to create a legal status of war. President Jefferson sent a squadron of frigates to the Mediterranean to protect our ships but limited its mission to defense in the narrowest sense of the term.
Catch that? "to protect our ships but limited its mission to defense in the narrowest sense of the term." He didnt declare war.
Congress has acted and has decided what it wants to do about Sept. 11, IT resolved to give Bush 60 days to use force and if he wants more he has to ask. They limited his war powers and tied his hands. The Joint Resolution from Congress specifically points to the War Powers Resolution Requirments.
. Here is the snip from the Joint Resolution from Congress authorizing force
"Section 2. Authorization for Use of United States Armed Forces
(a) That 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.
(b) War Powers Resolution Requirements" Here is a snip from the begining of thw War Powers Resolution
"Public Law 93-148 93rd Congress, H. J. Res. 542
November 7, 1973 Joint Resolution Concerning the war powers of Congress and the President.
Resolved by the Senate and the House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled.
SHORT TITLE SECTION 1. This joint resolution may be cited as the "War Powers Resolution". PURPOSE AND POLICY
SEC. 2. (a) It is the purpose of this joint resolution to fulfill the intent of the framers of the Constitution of the United States and insure that the collective judgement of both the Congress and the President will apply to the introduction of United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicate by the circumstances, and to the continued use of such forces in hostilities or in such situations.
(b) Under article I, section 8, of the Constitution, it is specifically provided that the Congress shall have the power to make all laws necessary and proper for carrying into execution, not only its own powers but also all other powers vested by the Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof. (c) The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to
Here are the 3 choices and CONGRES PICKED #2 "specific statutory authorization" ALSO if you notice it says OR before #3
(1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces."
OK now continuing..... from The Joint Resolution from Congress, it specifically points out Statutory Authorization Here is the snip
"(1) Specific Statutory Authorization — Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution.
(2) Applicability of Other Requirements — Nothing in this resolution supersedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution. "
Now Here is section 8 (a) and 5 (b) from the War Powers Resolution
SEC. 8. (a) Authority to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into situations wherein involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances shall not be inferred-- (1) from any provision of law (whether or not in effect before the date of the enactment of this joint resolution), including any provision contained in any appropriation Act, unless such provision specifically authorizes the introduction of United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into such situations and stating that it is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of this joint resolution; or (2) from any treaty heretofore or hereafter ratified unless such treaty is implemented by legislation specifically authorizing the introduction of United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into such situations and stating that it is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of this joint resolution.
Sec. 5(b) Within sixty calendar days after a report is submitted or is required to be submitted pursuant to section 4(a)(1), whichever is earlier, the President shall terminate any use of Untied States Armed Forces with respect to which such report was submitted (or required to be submitted), unless the Congress (1) has declared war or has enacted a specific authorization for such use of United States Armed Forces, (2) has extended by law such sixty-day period, or (3) is physically unable to meet as a result of an armed attack upon the United States. Such sixty-day period shall be extended for not more than an additional thirty days if the President determines and certifies to the Congress in writing that unavoidable military necessity respecting the safety of United States Armed Forces requires the continued use of such armed forces in the course of bringing about a prompt removal of such forces. So since congress did not declare war and the only thing it did declare was "Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution" and I guess you could say Section 8 (a)(1),
My reply is pasted below:
*****************************
I would agree with this article, if there was a Declaration of War. There isn't, yet. The justification for these tribunals needs to come from history--both Lincoln and FDR had obtained such Declarations prior to their restriction on liberties. What a Declaration tends to do is clearly define the belligerents
Actually, Abraham Lincoln did not obtain a Declaration of War against the Confederate States of America. Try finding the text of such a declaration of war. You will never find it.
The United States of America never declared war during the Civil War. This was in keeping with its position that the rebel states did not form a new nation, rather they were states in which a rebellion was taking place. Abraham Lincoln issued a Proclamation that an insurrection existed in the states of SC, GA, FL, AL, MS, LA, and TX on 15 Apr 1861 (Messages & Papers of the Presidents, vol. V, p3214). He also proclaimed a blockade of Southern harbors on 19 Apr 1861, and the date of this proclamation was taken by the Supreme Court in several cases to be the official beginning of the insurrection.
In the war against terrorism, a declaration of war is not appropriate when you are fighting what legally amount to saboteurs, filibusters, pirates and terrorists. Wars are declared against sovereign states. These individuals represent no sovereign state.
Congress has passed an authorization to use force against all the organizations linked to the 11 September attack. That is the Constitutional equivalent of a declaration of war when a sovereign nation is not the enemy.
Legally, anyone who attacks the U.S. automatically becomes a belligerant the instant that the attack starts. The U.S. Navy was shooting back at the Japanese on 7 December 1941 although Congress had not yet declared war. Japan clearly defined itself as a belligerent by it's own action. Any foreign group, either known or previously unknown, who attacks or facilitates an attack on the U.S. is likewise an automatic and defined belligerent by it's own action.
In regards to terrorists living within the U.S., Abraham Lincoln has set the historical precedent that the President can declare a certain group of people to be in a state of insurrection against the U.S.
139 posted on 11/19/01 7:48 AM Pacific by Polybius