TURNING THE SCREW: New Anti-ISIS Proposal Could ‘Redefine’ War Once Again

As the stage is being set for another major conflict in the Middle East, there are some legal issues to consider in lieu of the Congressional gridlock that will inevitably ensue over Obama’s new war proposal. The apparent proposal said to be for ISIS, will be used to polarize the public – while loosening the definitions of war once again…
War resolution & military force
The War Powers Resolution of 1973 has been a source of debate with US leadership since it was passed. The ‘constitutionality’ of the joint Congressional law has been questioned by every US President since its establishment. The main impetus of the ’1973 WPR’ was introduced as a way to check the authority of a president when declaring war, stipulating that Congress give the official declaration for any armed forces combat mission on behalf of the United States. The resolution was meant to strengthen Congress’s ability to participate in the event of a declared war, granting that a US President can only place troops into a hostile situation or situations, ‘where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances.’
The 1973 WPR was passed as a reaction to the lack of Congressional oversight after PresidentsJohn Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon, had kept US armed forces in Southeast Asia for almost a decade. The Resolution required that President communicate to Congress within 48 hours the placement of US armed forces around the globe. Congress would also have to grant an extension of war after 60 days. The joint resolution passed despite Nixon’s Presidential veto at the time.

This post was published at 21st Century Wire on FEBRUARY 15, 2015.