Saturday, August 31, 2013

Should Congress Step Up to Declare War without needing to be Asked?

   I think it neat President Obama today said he will seek Congressional authorization for proposed action in Syria. Too often, military intervention has begun before approval was obtained.
   But, what of this thought: Why does Congress need to wait for an invitation before voting on whether to enter an armed conflict? If the Constitution gives Congress the power to declare war, shouldn't Congress be taking the initiative?
   Yet, I don't believe of any of the times war has been declared, Congress took up the issue without being asked.
   They should.
    Also, bridging this to what I blogged yesterday, despite the tens of thousands of civilians who have been killed without us intervening in the Syrian war, I do wonder, after all, if this chemical weapons matter does warrant limited military action. 'Tis said that more lives have been lost (reportedly more than 1,400, including about 400 children) in this use of chemical weapons than any from any chemical weapons attack in 25 years. Does the use of chemical weapons up the ante for death, increase the ability of the attacker to kill a greater number of people? If so, an argument can be made for drawing a "red line," as President Obama called it, against the use of chemical weapons.
   But, then, remains the question of whether the U.S. should police the world.

No comments:

Post a Comment