# Is the U.S. technically at war?
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-u-s-technically-at-war/165341
**Category:** Factual Questions
**Created:** [March 31, 2003, 2:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-u-s-technically-at-war/165341 "2003-03-31T02:03:20Z")
**Posts on this page:** 11
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@tigsnort](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tigsnort)
#### Post date: [March 31, 2003, 2:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-u-s-technically-at-war/165341/1 "2003-03-31T02:03:20Z")
Sorry if this has been answered before, I tried doing a search but came up empty.
Is the U.S. at “war”, officially, technically? I assume since Congress never declared war (which is the only way, constitutionally speaking, to do it), we’re not technically at war. What then, technically, are we at? Was Bush given the power to declare war himself, or just “do what he needed to do”?
---
### Author:  [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)
#### Post date: [March 31, 2003, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-u-s-technically-at-war/165341/2 "2003-03-31T02:13:18Z")
Just out of curiosity, what, specifically, were your search techniques?
---
### Author:  [@brianmelendez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brianmelendez)
#### Post date: [March 31, 2003, 2:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-u-s-technically-at-war/165341/3 "2003-03-31T02:15:15Z")
[Why can’t we declare war?](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=169862)
[Has the US declared war on Iraq?](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=171316)
[U.S. Congress Has only Declared War Four Times?](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=169870)
[So is this war and if so who declared it?](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=169131)
---
### Author:  [@Earl\_Snake-Hips\_Tucker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Earl_Snake-Hips_Tucker)
#### Post date: [March 31, 2003, 2:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-u-s-technically-at-war/165341/4 "2003-03-31T02:16:08Z")
Also, what do you mean by “technically?”
Look up “war” and “state of war” in any decent dictionary, and see if we are “at war.”
---
### Author:  [@friedo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/friedo)
#### Post date: [March 31, 2003, 6:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-u-s-technically-at-war/165341/5 "2003-03-31T06:00:35Z")
Yes, the US is at war. Countries don’t usually bother with formal Declarations of War anymore, and in the case of the US, such a declaration from Congress activates a number of Federal laws which would only be useful in a “total war” scenario, e.g. something similar to WWII.
---
### Author:  [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)
#### Post date: [March 31, 2003, 6:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-u-s-technically-at-war/165341/6 "2003-03-31T06:30:49Z")
And to anticipate another question, yes the U.S. and Britain are obligated to follow the Geneva Conventions whether the war is declared or undeclared.
---
### Author:  [@Coriolanus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Coriolanus)
#### Post date: [March 31, 2003, 6:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-u-s-technically-at-war/165341/7 "2003-03-31T06:55:53Z")
Confrefs of These United States did not Declare War against any sovereign nation.
No. The U.S. is not at War.
President GW Bush initiated(employed/used/whatever) the War Powers Act - a broad set of powers that Congrefs yielded in 1968 and never bothered to rescind.
Yes. The U.S. is at War.
President Bush wielded/used/whatever the War Powers Act when he deployed troops to the Middle East. The party affiliation of Congrefs was irrelevant - nearly all of them “Me Too’d” Bush.
---
### Author:  [@Dogface](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dogface)
#### Post date: [April 1, 2003, 6:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-u-s-technically-at-war/165341/8 "2003-04-01T06:49:25Z")
The “War Powers Act” (Public Law 93-148) is not “a broad set of powers”, nor was it passed in 1968. I challenge you to give a cite for your patently and utterly false claims. The War Powers Act was passed in 1973, specificially to _limit_ Presidental military action. Of specific note is section 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 United 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.
A copy of the complete text is at:
[http://www.cs.indiana.edu/statecraft/warpow.html](http://www.cs.indiana.edu/statecraft/warpow.html)
Every President after Carter (who signed it into law) has claimed that the act is Unconstitutional in that it restricts Presidential “Commander in Chief” status too much. Nevertheless, every president since 1973 has dutifully submitted to its provisions, all the while protesting that such submission was unnecessary.
The Act has never been put to the test, since Congress has never denied an authorization under its terms nor has any authorized use of force gone beyond the allotted 90 days (garrison and UN-authorized activity don’t count, for some reason). Technically, though, according to the War Powers Act, US forces cannot be used in hostile action outside the USA for more than 90 days (the original 60-day period plus the permitted 30-day extension) without a formal declaration of war.
There has been no formal declaration of war (the railroads have not been nationalized, for example). Bush did go to Congress for his authorization. The clock is now ticking. Unfortunately, (as I am a strict Constructionalist), I fear that Congress will not exercise its Constitutional prerogative to force a formal Declaration or get out.
---
### Author:  [@Zorro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zorro)
#### Post date: [April 1, 2003, 1:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-u-s-technically-at-war/165341/9 "2003-04-01T13:15:58Z")
There are over 200,000 US troops in Iraq, there have been 12 consecutive days of bombing, 1000 air sorties a day, 600 cruise missiles fired, and a whole bunch of military personnel and civilians killed.
I put it to you that this, technically, is a war.
---
### Author:  [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)
#### Post date: [April 1, 2003, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-u-s-technically-at-war/165341/10 "2003-04-01T15:31:18Z")
> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by Dogface \*
> \*\*Every President after Carter (who signed it into law) has claimed that the act is Unconstitutional in that it restricts Presidential “Commander in Chief” status too much. \*\*
No, Carter did not sign it into law. Congress overrode Nixon’s veto on November 7, 1973. Carter did not even enter office until 1977.
> [@](#):
>
> - Nevertheless, every president since 1973 has dutifully submitted to its provisions, all the while protesting that such submission was unnecessary. \*\*
Presidents have generally complied with the WPR, but they have not fully complied. Out of 94 reports so far filed under the WPR, only one has cited section 4(a)(1), which starts the clock on the time limit. That one report was in 1975.
> [@](#):
>
> - The Act has never been put to the test, since Congress has never denied an authorization under its terms nor has any authorized use of force gone beyond the allotted 90 days (garrison and UN-authorized activity don’t count, for some reason). \*\*
Congress authorized the deployment of our troops to multilateral peacekeeping missions in Lebanon and the Sinai. The war in Kosovo was not authorized by Congress - the Senate passed a resolution to authorize military operations by 58-41, but it failed in the House, 213-213. Lawsuits in federal courts were basically dismissed because of the ruling that individual members of Congress do not have standing to sue on issues of war powers, similar to other suits - so you’re pretty much right on the “not been tested” part.
> [@](#):
>
> - Technically, though, according to the War Powers Act, US forces cannot be used in hostile action outside the USA for more than 90 days (the original 60-day period plus the permitted 30-day extension) without a formal declaration of war.
> The clock is now ticking. \*\*
No it is not. There is no requirement under the War Powers Act that Congress declare war. See section 2©, which lays out three situations under which the president can use military force: "(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. "
Also see section 5(b)(1) which requires the president to withdraw troops unless Congress “has declared war or has enacted a specific authorization for such use of United States Armed Forces.”
Finally, see Public Law 107-243, which even cites section 8(a)(1) of the WPR as the source of the legitimacy for the use of force.
---
### Author:  [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)
#### Post date: [April 1, 2003, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-u-s-technically-at-war/165341/11 "2003-04-01T15:34:12Z")
oops, text of PL 107-243:
[http://purl.access.gpo.gov/GPO/LPS25226](http://purl.access.gpo.gov/GPO/LPS25226)