Is there a legal definition of "war," as far as the US Constitution is

[Poiuyt]

concerned?

I ask because Bush has assumed all kinds of powers from being a "war president." Wouldn't the US legally have to be at war for him to assume these powers? And just what is war? Does the Congress have to declare war, as it says in the Constitution, or is it sufficient that our soldiers are fighting somewhere?

[The Stranger]

1. Yes, Congress has to declare war.

If Congress has not declared war, then the nation is not at war, according to the Constitution.

Next question.

[DELUSIONAL]

5. Bingo!!! Exactly!

Why are they letting him get away with calling himself a "war President"

when

WAR HAS NOT BEEN DECLARED!

Why aren't the democratic spineless elected jerks not screaming bloody murder???

My remark on another thread:

Since war has NOT been formally declared

how the hell can bushie have "war powers"??

Unless bushie is at war with every living thing in the world??

[TheBaldyMan]

7. we don't but the MSM does, along with the other spineless drones

[Inland]

6. But but but but Tony Scalia just said, "War is war" as the reason why

detainees have no rights under the consitution. Now you say we aren't in what the constitution defines as a war?

Maybe what he meant was, "War is whatever Bush says is war is war."

[Hobarticus]

2. Hey now, no asking questions...just go back to being afraid

of that boogeyman in the closet.

Technically, I've always understood that Congress approves a war after the POTUS asks them to. Lot of good that's done us.

[MadMaddie]

3. Congress has to declare war is my understanding.

Alberto Gonzalez has taken unprecedented power in mis-interpreting the Constitution.

If our soldiers are fighting somewhere doesn't necessarily mean they are at war... Somalia wasn't a war, participating in the Yugoslavia mess wasn't war.

[Xithras]

4. War Powers Act

http://www.cs.indiana.edu/statecraft/warpow.html