# Domestic law, international law, Syria, and us **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 28, 2013, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-law-international-law-syria-and-us/667432 "2013-08-28T19:34:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-law-international-law-syria-and-us/667432/1 "2013-08-28T19:34:36Z")
So, if we send some cruise missiles to plaster portions of Syria, without a declaration of war by Congress (or equivalent authorization by Congress) is that: (a) legal under international law? (b) legal under domestic law? I’m not too up to speed on international law. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-law-international-law-syria-and-us/667432/2 "2013-08-28T19:44:27Z")
Short answer; Domestic law - Yes. International law - The Hague? How many divisions do they have? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-law-international-law-syria-and-us/667432/3 "2013-08-28T20:56:11Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > Short answer; > > Domestic law - Yes. What would the legal basis be for such an attack? I ask because the War Powers Act says: > [@](#): > > 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 (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. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-law-international-law-syria-and-us/667432/4 "2013-08-28T21:02:16Z")
Are we to take it that you think it _isn’t_ legal under domestic law? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-law-international-law-syria-and-us/667432/5 "2013-08-28T21:56:39Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > What would the legal basis be for such an attack? > > I ask because the War Powers Act says: What does the WPA have to say about launching missiles? The part you quoted referred to “US Armed Forces”. At any rate, whatever Obama does in Syria will be _waaaaaay_ less than what Clinton did in Serbia. So, been there done that. ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 10:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-law-international-law-syria-and-us/667432/6 "2013-08-28T22:20:42Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > So, if we send some cruise missiles to plaster portions of Syria, without a declaration of war by Congress (or equivalent authorization by Congress) is that: > > (a) legal under international law? > (b) legal under domestic law? > > I’m not too up to speed on international law. I can’t resist the way you innocently bat your eyes while you propose a gotchacha by candlelight. Even though I know it’s a trap I can’t resist it. The correct answer in America is a- who cares? We don’t need no stinking badges. b- it’s all Obama’s fault for laying a red line on the ground when everybody and his brother knows he should have laid a blue line if at all. ---
**Author:** ![marshmallow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@marshmallow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/marshmallow)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-law-international-law-syria-and-us/667432/7 "2013-08-28T22:45:06Z")
Just lump it with the rest of the terror wars and you’re golden. ---
**Author:** ![Grumman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/43a26b/32.png) [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-law-international-law-syria-and-us/667432/8 "2013-08-28T22:56:03Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > So, if we send some cruise missiles to plaster portions of Syria, without a declaration of war by Congress (or equivalent authorization by Congress) is that: > > (a) legal under international law? > (b) legal under domestic law? > > I’m not too up to speed on international law. By my reading, under domestic law he must ask for a declaration of war within the first two days, and cannot continue beyond sixty days unless that declaration is made. Of course, this assumes you’re speaking English and not weaselese, where “imminent” does not require imminence, “threat” does not require a threat and a bombing campaign does not count as “hostilities”. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 11:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-law-international-law-syria-and-us/667432/9 "2013-08-28T23:28:41Z")
1. It depends. 2. It depends. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 11:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-law-international-law-syria-and-us/667432/10 "2013-08-28T23:43:32Z")
For good or ill, our law on the subject appears to be that whatever the President gets away with is legal. Invade a sovereign nation because there are Cubans there, operating bulldozers (Reagan). Sure, why not? Wink and nod at the assassination of an inconvenient Asian President (Kennedy)? OK doke. Precedent don’t mean squat. Nor does the Constitution. If Obama launches so much as a Nerf ball, there are members of Congress who have their impeachment speeches written, only need to fill in the blanks. Unless viral internet evidence of Assad’s forces using kittens for hand grenades surfaces, there is no kind of win situation for Obama anywhere here. You gotta know that at least once today he thought about stepping up to the microphone and saying “They’re right, its all true, I was born in Kenya and trained by Al Queda. I’m handing Joe Biden the keys to the Oval Office and I’m outa here…” ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-law-international-law-syria-and-us/667432/11 "2013-08-28T23:59:43Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Are we to take it that you think it _isn’t_ legal under domestic law? No…but that’s because I think the War Powers Act is itself unconstitutional. I am interested in the analysis of people who believe the War Powers Act to be valid. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 12:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-law-international-law-syria-and-us/667432/12 "2013-08-29T00:07:42Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > For good or ill, our law on the subject appears to be that whatever the President gets away with is legal. Invade a sovereign nation because there are Cubans there, operating bulldozers (Reagan). Sure, why not? Wink and nod at the assassination of an inconvenient Asian President (Kennedy)? OK doke. > > Precedent don’t mean squat. Nor does the Constitution. If Obama launches so much as a Nerf ball, there are members of Congress who have their impeachment speeches written, only need to fill in the blanks. > > Unless viral internet evidence of Assad’s forces using kittens for hand grenades surfaces, there is no kind of win situation for Obama anywhere here. You gotta know that at least once today he thought about stepping up to the microphone and saying “They’re right, its all true, I was born in Kenya and trained by Al Queda. I’m handing Joe Biden the keys to the Oval Office and I’m outa here…” In my view, Obama – or any President – has the legal right to order a missile strike. But again, my view comes from the belief that Congress can’t constrain the President by means of the War Powers Act. And every president has reported to Congress “consistent with” the Act as opposed to “in accordance with,” to signal their disagreement with the Act’s application. But other folks who believe in the War Powers Act – what do they say? ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-law-international-law-syria-and-us/667432/13 "2013-08-29T00:14:36Z")
Antecedents are _HARD_! Especially when they comprise negative statements. Edited to read: Now that you’ve posted #12, I thank you for removing the confusion. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-law-international-law-syria-and-us/667432/14 "2013-08-29T00:14:51Z")
If you determined to discuss this in the rarified aether of Constitutional theory, I must recuse, hard to type once my eyes glaze over. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 12:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-law-international-law-syria-and-us/667432/15 "2013-08-29T00:21:08Z")
By the way, **Bricker** , pursuant to your argument in post 12, is there any merit to the notion that the constitutional grant of war powers to the President applies only in the presence of a congressional declaration of war? ---
**Author:** ![WillFarnaby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/willfarnaby/32/514_2.png) [@WillFarnaby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WillFarnaby)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-law-international-law-syria-and-us/667432/16 "2013-08-29T00:32:48Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > What does the WPA have to say about launching missiles? The part you quoted referred to “US Armed Forces”. > > At any rate, whatever Obama does in Syria will be _waaaaaay_ less than what Clinton did in Serbia. So, been there done that. Who do you think will launch the missiles? US Armed Forces or the US Post Office? So if Obama interned 50,000 Japanese it’s been there done that because it was waaaaaaaaay less than what Roosevelt did in WWII? ---
**Author:** ![WillFarnaby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/willfarnaby/32/514_2.png) [@WillFarnaby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WillFarnaby)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-law-international-law-syria-and-us/667432/17 "2013-08-29T00:40:00Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > In my view, Obama – or any President – has the legal right to order a missile strike. But again, my view comes from the belief that Congress can’t constrain the President by means of the War Powers Act. And every president has reported to Congress “consistent with” the Act as opposed to “in accordance with,” to signal their disagreement with the Act’s application. > > But other folks who believe in the War Powers Act – what do they say? By what means may Congress constrain the president, if at all, in your view? What is the purpose of the enumerated power of Congress to declare war, in your view? Also, do you think vesting one individual with the power to bring a nation’s military to a state of war squares with the concept of a democratic republic? ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 12:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-law-international-law-syria-and-us/667432/18 "2013-08-29T00:43:51Z")
Is this an Iraq gotcha? Hint: the WPA is not why we opposed Bush’s invasion. As to international law, a missile strike would be illegal without a supporting resolution by an IGO that Syria is a member of. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 12:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-law-international-law-syria-and-us/667432/19 "2013-08-29T00:48:49Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#): > > By the way, **Bricker** , pursuant to your argument in post 12, is there any merit to the notion that the constitutional grant of war powers to the President applies only in the presence of a congressional declaration of war? Reasonable people can obviously disagree, but in my opinion: no. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-law-international-law-syria-and-us/667432/20 "2013-08-29T00:55:18Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Is this an Iraq gotcha? Hint: the WPA is not why we opposed Bush’s invasion. As to international law, a missile strike would be illegal without a supporting resolution by an IGO that Syria is a member of. It’s not any gotcha. Amazing how worried you are about a gotcha; “The wicked flee when no man pursueth.” So as to international law, there’s no significance to Syria’s prior use of nerve gas? There has to be a supporting resolution before we can act? [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-law-international-law-syria-and-us/667432.md?page=2)