Make the argument that the Vietnam and Korean wars were constitutional.I've found a lot of information regarding how it's unconstitutional, but I'm having more difficulty finding facts debating...

Make the argument that the Vietnam and Korean wars were constitutional.

I've found a lot of information regarding how it's unconstitutional, but I'm having more difficulty finding facts debating otherwise. I need to look at both sides of the argument

Asked on by cbrel42

1 Answer | Add Yours

pohnpei397's profile pic

pohnpei397 | College Teacher | (Level 3) Distinguished Educator

Posted on

Of these two wars, the simpler case to make is for the Vietnam War.  While Congress did not declare war, it clearly gave the president the power to act as he wished in conducting the conflict.  It did this in the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution.  In the case of the Korean War, it is possible to argue that the president had to act quickly without going to Congress.  If there had been a long debate, the North Koreans could have won the war before the US did anything about it.  The Constitution does not define war and it does not require that the president get a declaration of war before engaging in any sort of military action.  Therefore, it is at least arguable that Truman had the authority to act because of his position as commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces.

We’ve answered 318,907 questions. We can answer yours, too.

Ask a question