- Joined
- Dec 23, 2009
- Messages
- 16,881
- Reaction score
- 2,980
- Location
- virginia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Private
You mean Article I sec 8.
Your position is flawed in that it is not necessary for Congress to declare war for a state of war to exist, nor for the Presient to exercise his Article II powers of the Commander in Chief.
The Congress is still involved, but the Congress chooses to authorize "the use of force", instead of calling it "war", so since they are still part of the process and also decide if "use of force" operations are continued to be funded, then why is there a problem?
Even during the widely popular Gulf War in 1991 (which we won), Congress authorized force and didn't call it a war.
Excuse me but aren't we still in iraq 19 years later?