Can Bush wage war unautherized for more than 90 dyas now?

[Tars_Tarkas]

I am unclear if Bush is now free to wage war without worrying about the 60 day then 30 day limit, could someone please tell me if he can now with the new terror bills?
(Please don’t turn this into a discussion on whether he should, for that is the job of another forum)

Thanx!!

[Tars_Tarkas]

typos in the subject line? GAH!!!

[Fang]

According to S.J.Res.23, the Resolution Authorizing the Use of Military Force, of September 14, 2001, Bush is allowed to use the armed forces against

those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 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.

Basically, he’s allowed to use force against anybody involved in 9/11 as long as they still exist and are dangerous.

There is also the issue of Iraq. According to H.J.Res.114, Authorizing the Use of Military Force against Iraq, Bush may wage war in Iraq as long as the purpose is to

(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq ; and

(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq .

, as long as he first determines that

(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq ; and

(2) acting pursuant to this joint resolution is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorist and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.

Basically Bush can fight a war in Iraq if Saddam is breaking UNSC resolutions or hurting US security interests, so long as peaceful methods have been exhausted and it doesn’t undermine the first reolution I mentioned.

So the answer is yes, he can more or less wage war as long as he deems necessary, but only against al-Qaeda, nations harboring al-Qaeda, Iraq, and anybody he determines participated in 9/11.

[Duckster]

I believe you will find that Bush’s authorization for conflict under HJR 114 (Public Law 107-243) specifically invokes the War Powers Resolution (Public Law 93-148).

In essence, the President has certain time limits in which to notify Congress in order to wage war against Iraq:

"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.

"Nothing in this joint resolution supersedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution.

“The President shall, at least once every 60 days, submit to the Congress a report on matters relevant to this joint resolution, including actions taken pursuant to the exercise of authority granted in section 3 and the status of planning for efforts that are expected to be required after such actions are completed, including those actions described in section 7 of the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-338).”
So he has to report to Congress every 60 days.

[Tars_Tarkas]

OK, what constitutes as the peaceful methods that have to be tried first? Did Iraq firing at the US planes the day after the resolutions being enacted immediatly give Bush authority to hit Iraq, or does he have to wait until Iraq violates the Weapons Inspectors agreement?
(btw, thanx for the detailed answers)

[greenphan]

As per the original post, it’s become a de facto rule in American politics that the President can commit US troops to battle without either asking Congress to declare war or invoking the war powers act, which would merely delay asking Congress to declare war.

Congress can pass resolutions supporting such actions, as I believe they did for Gulf War I. It wasn’t a formal declaration of war, but it was about the same.

I don’t have any cites. I googled briefly but became trapped in a web of useless websites. Off the top of my head (and that’s oh so reliable–hehe), Clinton attacked Kosovo, sent troops to Haiti, Somalia, and Bosnia. US troops fought and died, but they weren’t according to Hoyle wars.

And if my observations are off-base, just tell me so. It’s my second post so be gentle.

–greenphan