Why doesn't the Congress want to do its constitutional duty?

[kentuck]

It is clearly stated in the Constitution that only the Congress can declare war.

It is true that in 1973 they passed the War Powers Act to give the President the power to send troops to protect our "national security" or if there was a present and "imminent danger" to our country. It is also true that Presidents have violated the War Powers Act with their power plays for history. I think of Grenada and Manuel Noriega of Panama off the top of my head. Although they were small military operations, the Congress should have been involved.

But the Congress doesn't like to make decisions about "war and peace" because it might affect their next election. They like to take it easy whenever they can. They have abdicated their duty to declare war for a long time.

I am happy that the President put the hot potato in their laps. However, for him to make it real, he has to abide by the wishes of the Congress, if they vote NO on whether or not to bomb Syria.

[veganlush]

1. they can and will

a no vote is still a vote

[Thinkingabout]

2. Yes, Congress is trying to avoid doing their job, it would have been easier for Congress

For Obama to have made the decision but there was a lot of nasty remarks made about Libya so this time Congress can step up to the plate. I also agree what ever decision made by the Congress should stand, if it is a good decision or a bad decision.

[kentuck]

3. And some have already said that he would have been impeached...

if he had bombed without coming to the Congress? So, I guess, be careful what you wish for, Congress..