Is the war in Iraq an unjust war?

[Ender]

I already suspected all this. Just wanted you to bring in some facts for everyone else in the discussion. So it is an unjust war.

I think I understand: there is oil in Iraq so the war was unjust. Very comprehensive analysis.

Ender

 

[goofyjim]

I think I understand: there is oil in Iraq so the war was unjust. Very comprehensive analysis.

Ender

Well when we go in simply on oil interest alone…

There are other governments doing what Saddam Hussein did. But we’re not going after them because it doesn’t satisfy big business of oil. Therefore the war is unjust.

 

[dmelosi]

Well when we go in simply on oil interest alone…

There are other governments doing what Saddam Hussein did. But we’re not going after them because it doesn’t satisfy big business of oil. Therefore the war is unjust.

I guess it is too much to think that the well over 900,000 people that Sadaam was directly responsible for killing mean nothing.

He was president for 27 years, at the very most conservative numbers of 900,000 that is 30,000 plus people a year he has averaged.

He himself said that he was wanting to restart the wmd program (he already proved he would use this)

Do not people’s lives in other countries matter?

 

[estesbob]

I guess it is too much to think that the well over 900,000 people that Sadaam was directly responsible for killing mean nothing.

He was president for 27 years, at the very most conservative numbers of 900,000 that is 30,000 plus people a year he has averaged.

He himself said that he was wanting to restart the wmd program (he already proved he would use this)

Do not people’s lives in other countries matter?

Not when a republican is president. Recall Clinton bombed Bosnia without either congressional or UN approval. I guess when you kill people from 30,000 feet up that makes it just.

 

[goofyjim]

I guess it is too much to think that the well over 900,000 people that Sadaam was directly responsible for killing mean nothing.

He was president for 27 years, at the very most conservative numbers of 900,000 that is 30,000 plus people a year he has averaged.

He himself said that he was wanting to restart the wmd program (he already proved he would use this)

Do not people’s lives in other countries matter?

But there are leaders in other countries doing the same thing. Yet we ignore them because they have no oil. If killing one’s own citizens is justification for removing a regime we should be going to a lot more places than just Iraq. Like Kenya for instance.

 

[goofyjim]

Not when a republican is president. Recall Clinton bombed Bosnia without either congressional or UN approval. I guess when you kill people from 30,000 feet up that makes it just.

Just goes to prove my earlier claim. When a Republican does it it is a just war but when a Democrat does it it isn’t. You can’t have it both ways. You can’t simply justify all the Republican wars but discredit all the Democrat ones. Unless you want to continue playing the game of petty politics. This is an unjust war.

 

[dmelosi]

But there are leaders in other countries doing the same thing. Yet we ignore them because they have no oil. If killing one’s own citizens is justification for removing a regime we should be going to a lot more places than just Iraq. Like Kenya for instance.

So next you are going to tell me that Kenya has gassed people or they are threatening to use wmd?

 

[LRThunder]

But there are leaders in other countries doing the same thing. Yet we ignore them because they have no oil. If killing one’s own citizens is justification for removing a regime we should be going to a lot more places than just Iraq. Like Kenya for instance.

How many of them did we have a cease fire agreement with that ended a war? How many of them were either flaunting or appearing to flaunt the terms of that agreement?

 

[goofyjim]

So next you are going to tell me that Kenya has gassed people or they are threatening to use wmd?

They are slaughtering their own somehow. And they did it in Bosnia. But we can’t apporve of our actions there because it was a Democrat president. This all seems so one sided that only the Republicans can get us in a just war and never make a mistake. WRONG.

 

[dmelosi]

They are slaughtering their own somehow. And they did it in Bosnia. But we can’t apporve of our actions there because it was a Democrat president. This all seems so one sided that only the Republicans can get us in a just war and never make a mistake. WRONG.

I said nothing at all about Democrats, not sure why you twisted that.

 

[goofyjim]

How many of them did we have a cease fire agreement with that ended a war? How many of them were either flaunting or appearing to flaunt the terms of that agreement?

Inconsequential. We are ignoring those because there are no oil profit interests.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

I am not even sure it is correct to call are involvement in Iraq a “war” anymore.

Correct. The current condition would be called “occupation.”

 

[wabrams]

Correct. The current condition would be called “occupation.”

It’s my understanding what’s going on in Iraq doesn’t fit the military’s definition of an occupation.

 

[Verisimilitude]

How would we go about getting nations on board with such an action?

Did you agree with the analysis this response was too?

But that is not what history teaches us.

Please don’t sidetrack the issue. History is not the basis of my conclusion because history is not so pure. I have laid out reasonable cause to support the position that the Iraq War is unjust. Why do you still disagree? I have offered reasonable alternative actions that better support our faith and law and is less dangerous to our nation. Your ‘stay the course’ is not a response.

Powerful men rarely respond positively to peaceful gestures.

True, that is reason I quoted Christ as the example. Wa that just for Him to employ or do we have a responsibility as Catholics to do the same? What is your personal reluctance for trying? Even if they do not respond positively why are you willing to abandon your faith in response to their faiure and initiate an offensive war? You do realize that is my point in making them declare their irrationality so other nations will side with our reason?

Almost all of our gains in liberty, justice, and democracy have come at great costs. They have come at the “barrel of a gun” even if that barrel wasn’t always smoking. And our forefathers wisdom dictates that such actions will always be necessary.

Great cost is not always result in offensive war. Do you think Iraq2 is defensive rather than offensive? Does it make a difference to you? How many dead US sodiers per gallon of gas is great enough?

The wisdom of our Founders established a non-intervention foreign policy and specific proceedures required to declare formal wars. Do you really think supporting/creating Islamic nations is in our best interest in the WOT?

 

[estesbob]

But there are leaders in other countries doing the same thing. Yet we ignore them because they have no oil. If killing one’s own citizens is justification for removing a regime we should be going to a lot more places than just Iraq. Like Kenya for instance.

How much oil was there in Bosnia? Somalia? Panama? Grenada?

 

[Ender]

I have laid out reasonable cause to support the position that the Iraq War is unjust.

I think what you laid out were your reasons why you find the war unwise but it can be unwise without being unjust. It may well turn out to have unpleasant results or results that were not nearly worth the cost but that has nothing to do with whether the attempt was unjust.

Ender

 

[Verisimilitude]

I think what you laid out were your reasons why you find the war unwise but it can be unwise without being unjust. It may well turn out to have unpleasant results or results that were not nearly worth the cost but that has nothing to do with whether the attempt was unjust.

Ender

Ambiguity has become an art form. Obfuscation a sheild.

Would you object to the pro-war label to describe your continued support or object like the pro-death people do when I apply that label to them? Would you prefer pro-justice like they prefer pro-choice? Is the only difference is you are right and I am wrong?

Do you feel this war is a wise decision now?

Please explain your rationalization for continued military aid and sending billions of borrowed US income tax dollars to Egypt, Arabia, and Pakistan and now Iraq and Afghanistan. Is it Just to give them means to suppress the majority of their citizens that call their leaders corrupt because of our influence and who we call dictators? (It seems to me like holding the mans wife while he beats her.)

Is it Just to send our CIA into their countries to influence their democratic elections? Would you object to that here?

Tell me what objectives have not been meet given in 2002/2003 by this administration as reason to go in the first place.

Can you describe the benefits to America and how creating a democratic Islamic government serves our purpose? Would you object if they freely elect al-Sadr as Prime Minister?

Explain to me your view of the ideology we are fighting and how it is unrelated to Islam itself.

Who specifically asked us for help justifing this war in your opinion? Why didn’t the UN- irrelevant as I think them- support our efforts?

What actual threat did Saddam pose in delivering WMD’s to America? Was he any more likely to send out suicide bombers from Iraq to America than ‘radicals’ in Egypt or Jordan or Arabia?

How different is al-qaeda to the MS-13 gang in your opinion? Is it only becasue bin Laden was more successfull in one fell swoop than years of gang violence in America?

 

[bobzills]

I guess it is too much to think that the well over 900,000 people that Sadaam was directly responsible for killing mean nothing.

If so, why then did Ronald Reagan hand over more than 40 billion dollars to Saddam Hussein? Why did the USA provide Iraq with intelligence and military support (in secret and contrary to this country’s official neutrality) in accordance with policy directives from President Ronald Reagan. These were prepared pursuant to his March 1982 National Security Study Memorandum (NSSM 4-82) asking for a review of U.S. policy toward the Middle East.?
Why is Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam Hussein? It doesn’t look like Rumsfeld is expressing any disapproval of Saddam’s chemical weapons here?

gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/shakinghands_high.wmv

 

[Ryan29]

Besides the foreign policy run amok that insures America more future wars. In Iraq, Christians were more of a protected group under Saddam, now they are underground preaching in secret under threat of death. Saddam was a vile dictator, but he was a typical despot from the middle east. The reason democracy hasn’t really flourished is because Muslims need an iron fist (if you like it or not). They don’t typically like a grey area that is democracy something it not right or wrong something that can be debated. They knew what would happen to people if they stepped out of line. It’s draconian at best, but the murder rate under Saddam was nowhere near the killings that the Iraqis are doing to each other. I think it’s sad that good ole boys and girls from the cornfields of Memphis and surburbian neighborhoods of Savannah, GA are trying to mediate peace between Muslim tribes that have hated each other for five hundred or more years. All the while Iraq had no connection to the original reason circa 9/11 that the army got involved for. To me the biggest unjust part is how the army treats their veterans. For killed soldiers the army doesn’t pay enough for the soldier’s family that gave their life defending the liberty.

The difference between this version of nation building and Germany after world war II. The Marshall Plan & the Berlin Airdrop was successful because the German people wanted to get back to normal. When some derilicts from the old Reich tried to sabatoge the progress the people stood together and shouted down in all intents and purposes, terror. Have the Iraqis done this yet, because as long as they are too scared our Christian boys and girls will keep getting killed and having to stay there even longer.

 

[dmelosi]

If so, why then did Ronald Reagan hand over more than 40 billion dollars to Saddam Hussein? Why did the USA provide Iraq with intelligence and military support (in secret and contrary to this country’s official neutrality) in accordance with policy directives from President Ronald Reagan. These were prepared pursuant to his March 1982 National Security Study Memorandum (NSSM 4-82) asking for a review of U.S. policy toward the Middle East.?
Why is Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam Hussein? It doesn’t look like Rumsfeld is expressing any disapproval of Saddam’s chemical weapons here?

gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/shakinghands_high.wmv

I state this only because so many get so caught up on arguing “their” side that they leave refuse to see any good that was done.