yeah otherwise it would be hard to justify the invasion of Iraq among other things.

such laws generally don't apply to war. they don't even apply to soldiers.

an officer can order hundreds of soldiers to charge into certain death without repercussions - as long as the military goal he's trying to achieve is justifiable.

> such laws generally don't apply to war. they don't even apply to soldiers.

There was never a formal declaration of war on Iraq. Just saying.

Declaration of war comes under "due process of law" surely.

> such laws generally don't apply to war. they don't even apply to soldiers.

No declaration of war was made on Iraq.

> No declaration of war was made on Iraq.

Yes, it was; no special language is needed in a declaration of war; the "Authorization for the Use of Military Force" was plainly and unmistakeably a conditional declaration of war, the conditions for which were fulfilled.

If you declare war, you have to follow Geneva rules, so you can't do Guantanamo detentions; if you do Guantanamo detentions, you're not legally at war. Pick one.

> If you declare war, you have to follow Geneva rules,

The applicability of the Geneva Conventions is affected by the fact of war, but independent of whether there is a declaration. And even if it wasn't, violations of the Conventions would not reach back in time and change whether a declaration had occurred.