• PoisonTheWell@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      3 days ago

      Technically no. Congress passed the AUMF which let the President go after anyone they deemed complicit in 9/11. It did not declare war against specific nations iirc.

      • pyrinix@kbin.melroy.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        From my understanding, when you’re lobbing missles to another country after another country does something horrendous to you. That’s declaration of war.

        When the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, that was a declaration of war against the US.

        So how can all of what you said, not be a declaration? It doesn’t matter if Congress passed this or that. Shit happened, we went to war with Afghanistan, we sent soldiers and fired shit over to the Middle-East. Yet not a declaration?

        • dustyData@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          “I didn’t say it, I declared it!”

          But seriously, declaration of war is a legal term specific to each country internal law system. War, as a legal term, hasn’t actually been a thing either in international law since the 50s. It was changed to armed conflict. Which, before you think is stupid and why not call a spade a spade, is actually not that stupid. It created a well defined but much broader concept that (this is the important bit) is independent of a country’s internal law standing or diplomatic declarations thereof. If a situation fulfills the criteria, then it is an armed conflict whether the countries involved like it or declared it. It gives tools to nation states and international organizations to do certain things on the international stage more freely in these situations even when the countries involved don’t want them to.