In 1787, there were no intercontinental ballistic missiles, no suicide bombers. War was a scene easily painted: two masses of men wearing different uniforms, carrying muskets with bayonets on the end, marching to the beat of a drum.

Today, our wars do not easily fit into a single painting. There are no battles with clearly marked beginnings and ends; instead, we have weapons that can kill hundreds in seconds. Without a clear enemy, it is difficult for Congress to declare war. Our military endeavors are focused on targeted attacks in regions of the world without the deployment of thousands of troops.

Although war has a new meaning in a post-9/11 world and it is difficult to “declare war,” Congress is not enthused about being on the hook for going to war. Senators and representatives on both sides of the aisle are hesitant to declare war, largely because it requires them to vote on the record. Strangely enough, this is part of their job, but members of Congress are so concerned about what a vote might do for their re-election prospects that many don’t push for war declarations.

However, in a time where our country is heavily divided along party lines, decisions such as attacking other countries in a warlike fashion should not depend solely on one person. Congress serves as an accurate representation of the country and, therefore, military action should be based from this body.

The Maine congressional delegation should put their re-election ambitions in the back seat and put their constituents’ best interests at the front line. I would hope that my representatives in Washington would act as leaders in Congress and propose ways to be in better control of our military actions, whether that be legislation or starting conversation.

Maya Egan

Freeport

Copy the Story Link