You are here

NYT Says Congress Has 'Duty' to Make War--Rather Than the Right to Reject It

The whole point of granting war-making powers to Congress, it should be noted, was so that Congress could serve as a barrier to war. Somehow for the paper of record, this task has morphed into a “duty” to approve wars that are already taking place, lest the self-evidently good and noble war effort be undermined.

Adam Johnson, To stay on top of important articles like these, sign up here to receive the latest updates from all reader supported Evergreene Digest.


March 27, 2017 | The New York Times argues that Congress has a duty to authorize war–rather than a responsibility to determine whether war should be fought. reports come in detailing the degree to which Donald Trump has escalated the “War on ISIS”—and killed hundreds more civilians in the process—this would seem like a good time for the country to sit back and examine the United States’ approach to fighting “terrorism” and its recent iteration, the so-called Islamic State.

Not for the New York Times editorial board, which didn’t take the wave of civilians deaths as a reason to question the wisdom of America’s various “counter-terror,” nation-building and regime-change projects in the Middle East, but instead chose to browbeat Congress into rubber-stamping a war that’s been going on for almost three years.

The editorial, “Congress’s Duty in the War With ISIS” (3/26/17), began with a false premise.

Adam Johnson is a contributing analyst for

Full story …