• Political affairs -> International Politics

• 0 Comment

How has Congress historically reacted to acts of international aggression?

Blaine Toffler

Well, Congress has historically been all over the place when it comes to reacting to international aggression. There have been times when they've been all gung-ho about going to war, and other times when they've been more hesitant.

For example, after the 9/11 attacks, Congress was quick to pass the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), which gave President Bush the authority to use force against those responsible. This led to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, which are still ongoing to this day.

On the other hand, during the Vietnam War, Congress was much more reluctant to get involved. It took years of protests and public pressure before they finally passed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which authorized President Johnson to use military force in Southeast Asia.

More recently, Congress has been split on how to deal with international aggression. Some members are hawkish and want to take a tough stance against countries like North Korea and Iran, while others are more isolationist and want to avoid getting involved in foreign conflicts.

Overall, Congress has a mixed track record when it comes to responding to international aggression. Sometimes they get it right and take the appropriate action, but other times they make mistakes and end up making things worse. At the end of the day, it's up to the American people to hold their elected officials accountable and ensure that they're making responsible decisions on the world stage.