On the Legality of the Iraq War

There has been a murmuring among Bush critics (of whom I am occasionally a part)
that the Iraq was must end because it is an illegal war. I have been having to look at the bumper stickers saying "impeach Bush" and "Bush is a war criminal" so long and so often that I could gag. Their line of reasoning is that Congress has never declared war on Iraq (not withstandign the 2002 Resolution authorizing the use of Military force) and therefore Bush has no legal authority to remain there. Not one to trust the media who makes things up or party pundits who spin for their own agenda, I decided to do the unthinkable among the hoi polloi: I actually looked the laws up myself!

The real question is: is the formal declaration of war an antiquated concept? Legally, it would seem so. Congress's "vote of confidence" in the form of it's 2002 Joint Resolution for the Use of Military force in Iraq" is legal authority enough under the War Powers Act of 1973. Don't believe me? Here is a portion if the text:

Section 5: (b) Within sixty calendar days after a report is submitted or is
required to be submitted pursuant to section 4(a)(1), whichever is earlier, the
President shall terminate any use of United States Armed Forces with respect to
which such report was submitted (or required to be submitted), unless the
Congress (1) has declared war or has enacted a specific authorization [italics mine]for such use of United States Armed Forces

It goes on to say:

Notwithstanding subsection (b), at any time that United States Armed Forces are
engaged in hostilities outside the territory of the United States, its
possessions and territories without [italics mine] a
declaration of war or specific statutory authorization, such forces shall be
removed by the President if the Congress so directs by concurrent resolution.

The "without" is the important word, as Congess did in fact give the President authorization to go to war. Furthermore, The law gives congress no authority to revoke its authorization once it has given it. The preseident is therefore not obligated to remove troops at the behest of the whims of a majority changing Congress. Please, look it up for yourself. The truth is, whether you like it or not, the President is the Constitutionally authorized and he may commit troops wherever in the world he wants to. Take it up with the Founding Fathers. That being said, whether you agree with the war or not, Bush is not a war criminal so put up the bumper stickers, unless you like driving around advertising your failure to research the topic you pretend to care about.