Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Six Undeclared Wars Reveal Fatal Costs and Failed Oversight

Decades of unchecked war powers reveal catastrophic losses and broken oversight

Opinion

Six Undeclared Wars Reveal Fatal Costs and Failed Oversight
grayscale photo of man in black jacket and pants holding rifle

In America’s 250-year history, only five wars were formally declared by Congress as required by Article I of the U.S. Constitution. They and the respective presidents were: the War of 1812 (James Madison), the Mexican-American War (James Polk), the Spanish-American War (William McKinley), World War I (Woodrow Wilson), and World War II (Franklin D. Roosevelt).

Many Americans may not fully comprehend the magnitude of military casualties, exceedingly high financial costs, and public opposition to the six most recent wars (1950-present) that were not completely authorized by Congress.


The 1973 War Powers Resolution (WPR) attempted to constrain presidential power. However, presidents have exploited its many loopholes, and many in Congress view the resolution quite differently. With the information presented below, you may concur that it’s high time to tighten up the WPR.

Korean War (1950-1953)

President Harry S. Truman deployed forces in Korea without a complete congressional war declaration. The “police action” resulted in 36,574 military deaths and ~$30 billion financial cost; the majority of Americans opposed the conflict.

Vietnam War (1955-1975)

Presidents Dwight Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson, Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford were in power during the Vietnam War, which brought about 58,220 military deaths, a ~$168 billion price tag, and reached a peak opposition of 61% due to high casualties and the lack of a clear exit strategy. In Vietnam, the conflict is labeled as “The American War.”

Persian Gulf War (1990-1991)

President George H.W. Bush launched `Operation Desert Storm’ to expel Iraqi forces from Kuwait, whereby 382 military deaths occurred and $61 billion was spent. Since a quick, decisive victory was achieved, only 20-25% of Americans opposed the war, making it the only unauthorized war in which public opinion favored the conflict.

War in Afghanistan (2001-2021)

President George W. Bush launched `Operation Enduring Freedom’ in Afghanistan in response to the 9/11 attacks. The 20-year conflict brought about 2,456 military deaths, a $2.3 trillion cost, and the majority of Americans opposed the congressionally unauthorized conflict as it was perceived as an endless `forever war.’

Iraq War (2003-2011)

President George W. Bush was also responsible for the unauthorized war in Iraq, where “weapons of mass destruction” were not found, 4,418 U.S. casualties occurred, the cost was $2-3 trillion, and 63% of Americans opposed the conflict.

Iran War (2026-present)

Donald Trump’s executive action started the Iran War on Feb. 28. In less than 150 days of the conflict, 18 U.S. military deaths have occurred, and 624 U.S. military personnel have been injured. The full theatre financial cost will exceed $100 billion. Around 70% of Americans oppose the conflict due to: 1) lack of a coherent reason to start the military action, 2) fear of a broader Middle Eastern regional escalation, 3) lack of a clear exit strategy, and 4) Trump has claimed at least 38 times the U.S. has a deal or ceasefire with Iran (CNN).

War Powers Resolution of 1973

The WPR was designed precisely to restore the constitutional balance envisioned in Article 1, Section 8, which grants Congress the sole power to declare war.

In 1973, Congress viewed the WPR as a vital constitutional check to ensure one person could not drag the nation into an undeclared war. However, since 1973, many presidents have argued that the law unconstitutionally restricts the Commander-in-Chief’s ability to respond quickly to foreign threats and national emergencies.

Let the gravity of the following information sink in and decide if putting more teeth into the WPR is warranted:

  • 102,248 U.S. military personnel have been killed in America’s six congressionally unauthorized wars,
  • About 4.1 million of 9.1 million veterans who are receiving Veterans Administration medical care participated in the unauthorized wars
  • Approximately $5 trillion ($5,000,000,000,000) of taxpayer funds has been spent to fight the illegal wars.

WPR reformation suggestions

At least four changes to the WPR need to be made “if” Americans want to end unauthorized wars.

  • The statute needs to be amended to explicitly define military engagements to include fiber-optic guided drones, precision missile attacks, nano-surveillance helicopters, unarmed surface vessels, special operations raids, and cyber warfare, all of which did not exist in 1973.
  • The President must apprise Congress within 48 hours of any initiated military conflict, or all Pentagon funding would be put on hold.
  • The President has seven days after an initiated attack to get congressional approval of the military action, or all Pentagon funding is put on hold.
  • Any member of the House or Senate can file a petition to force a binding, non-amendable floor vote on whether to authorize or defund an active military conflict.

We the People

How do you assess the six major U.S. military engagements since 1950 that proceeded without explicit congressional authorization, and should the War Powers Resolution be modernized to prevent similar outcomes? Consider sharing your perspective with your Representative and Senators, especially given concerns that any future U.S.–Iran conflict under President Trump could risk becoming another prolonged “forever war,” echoing America’s 20‑year involvement in Afghanistan.

Steve Corbin is a Professor Emeritus of Marketing, University of Northern Iowa, and a non-paid freelance guest columnist contributor to 158 newspapers and 47 social media platforms in 44 states.


Read More

 Unrecognizable doctor prescribing pharmacy to patient.

After a 30-year decline, U.S. abortions are rising again. Texas data suggests bans may shift where abortions happen — not whether they do.

Natalia Gdovskaia/Getty Images

Pro-Life and Pro-Choice: Bridging the Gap

Introduction

We have spent decades arguing about abortion policy on ideological grounds. I think we now have an opportunity to step back, look at what actually happened, and ask a more fundamental question: What policies actually reduce the number of abortions?

I believe that is a question on which pro-life and pro-choice people should be able to agree. Whatever our differences about abortion itself, surely, we can agree that fewer abortions would be a good outcome.

Keep ReadingShow less
U.S. Capitol.

A rundown of the House bills most likely to become law this week — from seafood fraud enforcement to a sanctions bill critics call a tariff bill.

Photo by Andy Feliciotti on Unsplash

Both Chambers in Session this Week

Last Minute Rush

We’re not going to describe every bill the House aims to take action on this week because there’s lots. Instead, we’re going to focus on the ones that will become law if passed by the House and pull a few notable bills at the beginning of the legislative process. We’ll use the same level of discretion at the end of this week when we review what actually happened between today, Monday Sept. 14 and Friday, Sept. 18.

Probable New Laws

In addition to the bills listed below are also a couple of park renamings. All of these will, if passed, then go to the President for signing and once that’s done, become law.

Keep ReadingShow less
The White House, Washington, DC
A large white building with a fountain in front of it

We Can and Should Reform the President’s Pardon Power

On August 21, Congressman Jamie Raskin, the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, released a report entitled “Pardons, Inc.: How Trump and His Clemency-for-Cash Racket Let White-Collar Criminals and International Drug Dealers Walk Free and Dodge Billions in Restitution Owed to Their Victims.” As the title suggests, the report documents the president’s startling abuse of his constitutional power to grant pardons and reprieves.

If that problem were limited to Trump, we might look to the ballot box to remedy it. But it is not.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Trump Administration’s Plan for Protecting Consumers? Politely Ask Companies to Behave.

Russell Vought, the acting director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, testified before the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs in July.

Samuel Corum/Sipa USA via AP Images

The Trump Administration’s Plan for Protecting Consumers? Politely Ask Companies to Behave.

In mid-July testimony before Congress, Russell Vought boasted that, as the acting head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, he’d refashioned the agency’s approach to pursuing banks and other financial companies accused of exploiting Americans — the role Congress had created for the agency after the 2008 economic crash.

Vought had spent the first 18 months of the new Trump administration trying to dismantle the bureau, much as he and other appointees had done with the U.S. Agency for International Development. At CFPB, he’d ordered mass layoffs, tried to choke off the bureau’s funding and ended the lease on its headquarters, attempting to make good on his vow to put civil servants “in trauma.” But federal courts blocked Vought’s efforts to close the CFPB, with a judge at one point saying the administration had acted with “complete disregard” for Congress.

Keep ReadingShow less