Limiting the President's Power on the Military

Since the inception of our Constitution in 1789, the United States has often found itself committed to military action. Congress, however, has authorized the use of military force by declaring war only a handful of times. While the president has the power to use military force without the authorization of Congress, in some situations, the president's readiness to use this power has resulted in a disastrous amount of bloodshed. I suggest a major change in our government to put an end to these misguided military actions.

The solution to the problem has already been presented. In the time leading up to the first Persian Gulf War, then Joint Chief of Staff and former Secretary of State Colin Powell wrote the Powell Doctrine. The Powell Doctrine presents 8 questions that should be answered before any military operation:
"
1.
Is a vital national security interest threatened?
2.
Do we have a clear attainable objective?
3.
Have the risks and costs been fully and frankly analyzed?
4.
Have all other non-violent policy means been fully exhausted?
5.
Is there a plausible exit strategy to avoid endless entanglement?
6.
Have the consequences of our action been fully considered?
7.
Is the action supported by the American people?
8.
Do we have genuine broad international support?
" (Wikipedia OL)
If these questions are legitimately considered before a military action, its ultimate cost can be minimized. The only problem with the Powell Doctrine is that it is not enforceable. My proposal is to make it so.

I suggest requiring a president to give sworn testimony before Congress answering all of these questions prior to any military entanglement. If soldiers are put in harm's way, these guidelines must be fully adhered to. Any deceit on the part of the president would be perjury and would be grounds for impeachment and imprisonment. These guidelines were written by one of the military geniuses of the modern day, and resulted in the great military success of the first Gulf War. Each of the questions the doctrine asks should be answered in full. By enforcing this new idea, the United States can ensure that it will not be sending its young men to their deaths in foreign countries.

When we look at past military operations that have gone awry, it is obvious several of the "failed" wars failed to answer these questions from the start. For example, the current U.S. involvement in Iraq never garnered broad international support, a plausible exit strategy was never formulized, and the consequences that the Iraqi factions now have to deal with were never realized. The President rushed the process and took troops into Iraq while he still had the support of the people. In doing so, he created a problem that the children of today will have to resolve.

Forcing the President to give a sworn testimony before Congress where he answers these questions would greatly benefit our nation. The people would have a clear understanding of what they are getting involved with, and make a rational decision regarding their support for the war. Furthermore, such actions would cause the president to have a much more personal stake in the war. The outcome of the war would no longer result only in the deaths of soldiers, but could possibly lead to legal action against the President.

Although these actions would make it much more difficult for the President to get involved with military affairs, it would help add another check on the seemingly limitless power of the President and the military. I believe opposition would be found among the Presidency, the military, and individuals whom support decisive military action. However, advocates of the law would argue that it wouldn't slow the process down, it would merely encourage a strong plan. The implementation of my idea would save lives, and keep America from losing itself in its various foreign affairs. However, in hoping to get this legislation passed, I would likely run into problems facing the constitutionality of limiting the president's powers as Commander-in-Chief. However, the overwhelming support of the people would more likely result in its success.
Sources:
"Powell Doctrine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia". Wikipedia URL: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powell_doctrine)