Annhilation without representation: The constitutionality of war

Photo of author
Written By Ed Henry

The President and Vice President, the Cabinet, and every member of Congress, with their hand on the Bible, swore an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America. The Constitution is the law of the land.

Only Congress has the authority to declare war. The only mention of war is in the first Article of the Constitution which starts with: “Article 1. Section 1. All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representative” and then lists nine other Sections delineating those legislative powers.

Section 8 contains eighteen clauses starting with: “The Congress shall have power” then listing each clause.

Clause 11 reads: “To declare War, grant letters of Marquee and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water.”

Clauses 12 through 18 deal with raising and deploying armies, a navy, the militia, funding (for no longer than two years), and so forth, all powers reserved to Congress.

Article 5, requires an amendment to change the content of the Constitution. In whole, this Article reads as follows: “The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.”

The War Powers Act of 1973 is not an amendment to the Constitution and, of course, has never been ratified by three fourths of the States. Neither has it been considered by the Supreme Court of the United States whose job it is to interpret the Constitution. Its legality is, therefore, highly questionable.

This Act is an attempt to sidestep the Constitution and allow the President to commit U.S. troops to action in foreign lands without a declaration of war and during emergencies when there isn’t time for congressional debate.

As you will recall, it was popular to refer to actions in Vietnam and when we were called into Korea by the United Nations as “police actions” or situations where our troops were “advisors” to home forces in those nations. This attitudinal position was taken in Grenada and also when the UN called us into Bosnia and when we invaded Panama City where we wiped out more than 10,000 civilians overnight. But it was not used in the first Gulf War when the UN again called us in and Congress passed a declaration of war.

But you don’t hear us talking about police action or an advisory position in Iraq, do you? Oh no, everything points to outright War now, doesn’t it? We’re going to “liberate” the Iraqi people, but there is no home force to “advise” or that is going to fight by our side. And there has been no Declaration of War from Congress.

Congressman Ron Paul proposed such a declaration to Congress and was turned down. Congress refused to declare war and there has been no formal debate. The best we have is congressional consent. And consent is not a Declaration of War. It is not even a congressional act.

Not only is the 1973 War Powers Act subject to constitutional review, but the act of sending troops to Iraq without a formal Declaration of War may be a violation of the law of the land, a direct violation of the oath taken by our leaders and our representatives.

It’s not the people who object to this war that are the traitors. Those who speak out against this war are not being disloyal. In fact it’s somewhat amazing that with all of the 24/7 propaganda that has been given Americans with “Target Iraq” and “Showdown Iraq” there is still a significant number of people against a war at this time and against a war without UN approval. After more than six months of this constant hate and one sided blunderbuss, any protesters left should be buried in the miscellaneous or all-others column.

The administration’s rebuttal to this is downright childish. Many in Washington and several of our millionaire news readers and talking heads of television claim that we’ve already got a Declaration of War against Iraq from the 1991 Gulf War, and the president doesn’t need any other authorization to send hundreds of thousands of troops and equipment into Iraq.

With that sort of logic, we could again go to war with North Korea, Germany, Japan, or Italy. We could even take military action against Great Britain since we declared war on them properly in 1812.

What’s going on today started when President Bush decided on a first strike policy, a diplomatic policy that does not negate the need for a constitutional declaration of war from Congress. Under what authority are troops now on foreign soil? And what does this say about the oath taken by our leaders?

Published originally at EtherZone.com : republication allowed with this notice and hyperlink intact.”

Leave a Comment