World War II: Article Analysis
The United States has actually not declared war since World War II. In Article I, section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, Congress has the power,"to declare war [and] grant letters of marque and reprisal."(archives.gov) But Article II,Section 2 provides that,"The president shall be Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States." (fed-soc.org) While it's clear that the intended action for Congress alone to declare war, presidents don’t necessarily act with them but rather on their own will and belief. Truth be told as well, many events were presidents acted on their own have occoured. For example, after President Harry Truman bypassed Congress to go to war in Korea, presidents have paid almost no attention to the constitutional requirements.
…show more content…
Carter quotes,” In his original veto message, President Nixon asserted that he had no choice but to reject the Resolution because it was "clearly unconstitutional.””. President Nixon has a point in which he says that he shouldn’t even be following the resolution if the constitution already provides enough power through all this. Limiting the the presidents power is not necessary one bit, the position of President wouldn’t be needed or it would just become obsolete if they didn’t have the power to perform whatever they wanted that they believed would help. Even chairman Tom Connaly disagrees,"Do you think I'll have to ask Congress for a declaration of war if I decide to send American forces into Korea?" the President asked?"If a burglar breaks into your house," I said, "you can shoot at him without going down to the police station and getting permission. . . . You have the right to do it as commander-in-chief and under the UN Charter.". [25](fed-soc.org) The point that Conally was trying to bring across is that as a president, the ability to wage in combat should be under their choice, they are the ones voted for to provide for whats best for the citizens either way.
Carter quotes,” In his original veto message, President Nixon asserted that he had no choice but to reject the Resolution because it was "clearly unconstitutional.””. President Nixon has a point in which he says that he shouldn’t even be following the resolution if the constitution already provides enough power through all this. Limiting the the presidents power is not necessary one bit, the position of President wouldn’t be needed or it would just become obsolete if they didn’t have the power to perform whatever they wanted that they believed would help. Even chairman Tom Connaly disagrees,"Do you think I'll have to ask Congress for a declaration of war if I decide to send American forces into Korea?" the President asked?"If a burglar breaks into your house," I said, "you can shoot at him without going down to the police station and getting permission. . . . You have the right to do it as commander-in-chief and under the UN Charter.". [25](fed-soc.org) The point that Conally was trying to bring across is that as a president, the ability to wage in combat should be under their choice, they are the ones voted for to provide for whats best for the citizens either way.