Is the war in Iraq an unjust war?

[dmelosi]

For those that say that this was a republican war, I would like anyone of those to watch this video and then see their response.

bercasio.com/movies/dems-wmd-before-iraq.wmv

 

[SoCalRC]

It is probably worth pointing out that, if this is true:

news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080411/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/interrogation_tactics;_ylt=Ar_4eep.66QARByt3Ir.NHms0NUE

And the evidence is starting to look pretty damning, then the invasion of Iraq was unjust. CCC 2309 lays out criteria that must be met, and which should be determined by legitimate authority, but it is not the only reference that applies. For example:

"Non-combatants, wounded soldiers, and prisoners must be respected and treated humanely.

Actions deliberately contrary to the law of nations and to its universal principles are crimes, as are the orders that command such actions." - CCC 2313

However, having invaded the nation the Holy See has noted that we have a moral obligation to those who are now suffering as a result. Such as the millions of refugees, who are disproportionately Christian.

So far, we have again ignored Rome’s recommendations (more emphasis on border security, safe havens in the north for refugees, etc.) But given last week’s testimony before Congress, we US Catholics might want encourage our elected officials to reconsider. Both the US commander and ambassador in Iraq were asked to describe an achievable, stable Iraq. Instead, both acknowledged that some of the problems are systemic and seemingly unsolvable.

CCC 2309 is clear “there must be serious prospects of success”. If the commander of our armed forces cannot even imagine a stable, non-violent outcome from our current strategic approach, then it seems doubtful that we are meeting the moral obligation we now have to the Iraqi people.

 

[Ender]

It is probably worth pointing out that, if this is true:

news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080411/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/interrogation_tactics;_ylt=Ar_4eep.66QARByt3Ir.NHms0NUE

And the evidence is starting to look pretty damning, then the invasion of Iraq was unjust.

Here is the meat of the article:

*“The principals eventually authorized physical abuse such as slaps and pushes, sleep deprivation, or waterboarding.” *

So, we are to believe that the invasion of Iraq was unjust because we authorized interrogators to slap detainees and keep them up past their bedtimes? Goodness, who knew that just war theory allowed you to blow people up as long as you didn’t push them around? As for waterboarding, which is the only behavior mentioned that reasonably might be called torture, we know about this. It was done three times. There is no new news in this article. In fact, if the worst we are alleged to have done is slapping, pushing, and sleep deprivation, then - other than the question of waterboarding - the issue of torture has been wildly overblown. Thank you for clarifying that.

However, having invaded the nation the Holy See has noted that we have a moral obligation to those who are now suffering as a result.

Interesting observation. How would our abandoning Iraq by withdrawing our troops meet that obligation?

Ender

 

[SoCalRC]

So, we are to believe that the invasion of Iraq was unjust because we authorized interrogators to slap detainees and keep them up past their bedtimes? Goodness

Water boarding has been prosecuted as a war crime in the US since the Spanish American war. And the standard of international law is the Church’s, not mine.

You can ask my fellow Vietnam vets who were unfortunate enough to spend time in the Hanoi Hilton about some of the other techniques approved. It seems odd that you would claim that they are no big deal, since there were responsible for a presidential hopeful making anti-American propoganda for a foreign power.

But, I guess we can chalk it up to yet another case were you disagree with the Church on the inalienable rights of the human person.

In case anyone has any doubts about the story, the President was apparently embarrased at the implication that Cheney, not he, was in charge, so he made a point of expressly stating otherwise yesterday:

abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/LawPolitics/story?id=4635175&page=1

It never ceases to amaze me that those who are too cowardly to fight the wars they support and too greedy to even pay their fair share for them, are still so anxious to make light of the human costs. I guess it is true, ignorance is bliss.

 

[bobzills]

Water boarding has been prosecuted as a war crime in the US since the Spanish American war.

Yes water boarding is torture. Why does the American government engage in torturing people accused of crimes, even before giving them a chance to be tried and convicted first?

 

[dmelosi]

Yes water boarding is torture. Why does the American government engage in torturing people accused of crimes, even before giving them a chance to be tried and convicted first?

Throughout these posts, you have given many sources that this was a Bush war. Did you watch the link in post # 301? After watching the short video there, any comments that it may have been more than Bush? Or more than oil?

Or do you simply think that it was rhetoric by all of the politicians, democrats and republicans?

 

[bobzills]

Throughout these posts, you have given many sources that this was a Bush war. Did you watch the link in post # 301? After watching the short video there, any comments that it may have been more than Bush? Or more than oil?

Or do you simply think that it was rhetoric by all of the politicians, democrats and republicans?

If you want my personal opinion on the war in Iraq, I would say that it was started under a pretext of Iraq having weapons of mass destruction and under the subpretext of vengeance for 9/11. I would say that these were pretexts, but that there were other hidden factors which came into play and which are causing the USA to remain in Iraq. There is a big issue here of war profiteering. People who are making money or political capital on war and who have a stake in continuing the war, regardless of the amount of human suffering involved.
I am sorry to see the Americans using rendition and torture against people who have not been convicted of any crime, but who are merely suspects. What happened to what was taught in American history class concerning the wonderful system of American justice?

 

[dmelosi]

If you want my personal opinion on the war in Iraq, I would say that it was started under a pretext of Iraq having weapons of mass destruction and under the subpretext of vengeance for 9/11. I would say that these were pretexts, but that there were other hidden factors which came into play and which are causing the USA to remain in Iraq. There is a big issue here of war profiteering. People who are making money or political capital on war and who have a stake in continuing the war, regardless of the amount of human suffering involved.
I am sorry to see the Americans using rendition and torture against people who have not been convicted of any crime, but who are merely suspects. What happened to what was taught in American history class concerning the wonderful system of American justice?

I am not sure why you responded to my post without answering it.

 

[bobzills]

I am not sure why you responded to my post without answering it.

Because basically, I believe that the war in Iraq is an unjust war. I have read the statement of Bishop Botean on the Iraq war and I find that I agree with it. Especially when he said: "I am speaking to you solely as your bishop with the authority and responsibility I, though a sinner, have been given as a successor to the apostles on your behalf. I am speaking to you from the deepest chambers of my conscience as your bishop, appointed by Jesus Christ in his Body, the Church, to help shepherd you to sanctity and to heaven. Never before have I spoken to you in this manner, explicitly exercising the fullness of authority Jesus Christ has given his Apostles “to bind and to loose,” ( cf . John 20:23), but now “the love of Christ compels” me to do so (2 Corinthians 5:14). My love for you makes it a moral imperative that I not allow you, by my silence, to fall into grave evil and its incalculable temporal and eternal consequences.

Humanly speaking, I would much prefer to keep silent. It would be far, far easier for me and my family simply to let events unfold as they will, without commentary or warning on my part. But what kind of shepherd would I be if I, seeing the approach of the wolf, ran away from the sheep ( cf . John 10:12-14)? My silence would be cowardly and, indeed, sinful. I believe that Christ, whose flock you are, expects more than silence from me on behalf of the souls committed to my protection and guidance.

Therefore I, by the grace of God and the favor of the Apostolic See Bishop of the Eparchy of St. George in Canton, must declare to you, my people, for the sake of your salvation as well as my own, that any direct participation and support of this war against the people of Iraq is objectively grave evil, a matter of mortal sin. Beyond a reasonable doubt this war is morally incompatible with the Person and Way of Jesus Christ. With moral certainty I say to you it does not meet even the minimal standards of the Catholic just war theory.

Thus, any killing associated with it is unjustified and, in consequence, unequivocally murder. Direct participation in this war is the moral equivalent of direct participation in an abortion."

 

[dmelosi]

Because basically, I believe that the war in Iraq is an unjust war. I have read the statement of Bishop Botean on the Iraq war and I find that I agree with it. Especially when he said: "I am speaking to you solely as your bishop with the authority and responsibility I, though a sinner, have been given as a successor to the apostles on your behalf. I am speaking to you from the deepest chambers of my conscience as your bishop, appointed by Jesus Christ in his Body, the Church, to help shepherd you to sanctity and to heaven. Never before have I spoken to you in this manner, explicitly exercising the fullness of authority Jesus Christ has given his Apostles “to bind and to loose,” ( cf . John 20:23), but now “the love of Christ compels” me to do so (2 Corinthians 5:14). My love for you makes it a moral imperative that I not allow you, by my silence, to fall into grave evil and its incalculable temporal and eternal consequences.

Humanly speaking, I would much prefer to keep silent. It would be far, far easier for me and my family simply to let events unfold as they will, without commentary or warning on my part. But what kind of shepherd would I be if I, seeing the approach of the wolf, ran away from the sheep ( cf . John 10:12-14)? My silence would be cowardly and, indeed, sinful. I believe that Christ, whose flock you are, expects more than silence from me on behalf of the souls committed to my protection and guidance.

Therefore I, by the grace of God and the favor of the Apostolic See Bishop of the Eparchy of St. George in Canton, must declare to you, my people, for the sake of your salvation as well as my own, that any direct participation and support of this war against the people of Iraq is objectively grave evil, a matter of mortal sin. Beyond a reasonable doubt this war is morally incompatible with the Person and Way of Jesus Christ. With moral certainty I say to you it does not meet even the minimal standards of the Catholic just war theory.

Thus, any killing associated with it is unjustified and, in consequence, unequivocally murder. Direct participation in this war is the moral equivalent of direct participation in an abortion."

Does that mean it doesnt matter that the democrats thought it was a good idea, that you still blame only Bush?

 

[Ender]

Water boarding has been prosecuted as a war crime in the US since the Spanish American war.

No, it hasn’t.

You can ask my fellow Vietnam vets who were unfortunate enough to spend time in the Hanoi Hilton about some of the other techniques approved.

I was discussing what was in the article you cited. Nothing in that article pertained to the torture endured by those in the Hanoi Hilton. What was in the article, aside from the waterboarding, were things that would not have been considered torture by those who experienced the real thing.

But, I guess we can chalk it up to yet another case were you disagree with the Church on the inalienable rights of the human person.

You can. You would be mistaken to do so but I’m sure you can do it nonetheless.

It never ceases to amaze me that those who are too cowardly to fight the wars they support and too greedy to even pay their fair share for them, are still so anxious to make light of the human costs.

Who is this Christian judgment aimed at? Bush? Cheney? Me? At least be clear as to who you’re ranting on about.

I guess it is true, ignorance is bliss.

No, it’s just ignorance, but it’s not as unpleasant as anger and petulance.

Ender

 

[fhansen]

When GB invaded Iraq I didn’t eat for 3 days, it just hit me as so wrong-wrong-headed, stupid, just plain wrong. But I said, OK, I hope I’m wrong and you’re right about the WMDs because that’s what you referred to over and over again as the justification for the invasion but if you’re not…well you won’t get my vote and I, for one, will always resent your actions. Then they mismanaged the whole thing and people voted him in for a *second term *. And he stated himself that terrorism wasn’t even on the list of reasons for the war. In any case, neither party had much to brag about in this thing.

 

[Swan]

If you want my personal opinion on the war in Iraq, I would say that it was started under a pretext of Iraq having weapons of mass destruction and under the subpretext of vengeance for 9/11. I would say that these were pretexts, but that there were other hidden factors which came into play and which are causing the USA to remain in Iraq. There is a big issue here of war profiteering. People who are making money or political capital on war and who have a stake in continuing the war, regardless of the amount of human suffering involved.
I am sorry to see the Americans using rendition and torture against people who have not been convicted of any crime, but who are merely suspects. What happened to what was taught in American history class concerning the wonderful system of American justice?

 

[consumedconvert]

There was a great article in Foreign Policy a few months back (alas, it’s subscription only so I cannot post a link to it) entitled “The War We Deserve.” On the cover it showed GWB along with the caption: “IRAQ’S NOT HIS FAULT (it’s yours)”

It reminds us that a majority of Americans (myself included, unfortunately) supported this war, flags waving. (The Pope and I were unaqauinted as yet.) With all my heart I regret my staunch support of the war.

I think it should be pointed out that if this war was a blunder (as I believe it was), the fault lands squarely in our collective democratic lap. I view “Republican/Democrat” fingerpointing a little, well, pointless. Yes, GWB spearheaded it all; but there were people on both sides of the aisle who spoke as loudly as he did. And many of we, the people were to blame.

All that to say: mea culpa. How about the rest of us?

FP Article Blurb: foreignpolicy.com/users/login.php?story_id=3992&URL=http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=3992

 

[bobzills]

Does that mean it doesnt matter that the democrats thought it was a good idea, that you still blame only Bush?

The responsibility for the Iraq war lies with those who ignored the results of some 700 inspections at 500 sites carried out by the United Nations Monitoring Verifications and Inspection Commission. These 700 inspections did not find one instance of wapons of mass destruction. See the article by Hans Blix in the Guardian of March 21, 2008. Also, according to John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, :“Within the U.S. the main driving force behind the war was a small band of neoconservatives.” These were people in the Bush administration who chose to simply ignore the results of the United Nations Monitoring, Verificaiton, and Inspection Commission which declared that there were no weapons of mass destruction to be found.

 

[dmelosi]

The responsibility for the Iraq war lies with those who ignored the results of some 700 inspections at 500 sites carried out by the United Nations Monitoring Verifications and Inspection Commission. These 700 inspections did not find one instance of wapons of mass destruction. See the article by Hans Blix in the Guardian of March 21, 2008. Also, according to John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, :“Within the U.S. the main driving force behind the war was a small band of neoconservatives.” These were people in the Bush administration who chose to simply ignore the results of the United Nations Monitoring, Verificaiton, and Inspection Commission which declared that there were no weapons of mass destruction to be found.

Based on the way that you avoid the other direct questions, this is kind of how I thought you would respond, ie, see and hear only what you want to see and hear.

 

[SoCalRC]

No, it hasn’t.

Do you have any evidence to support your assertion, or is this just another case of your making stuff up?

I was discussing what was in the article you cited. Nothing in that article pertained to the torture endured by those in the Hanoi Hilton. What was in the article, aside from the waterboarding, were things that would not have been considered torture by those who experienced the real thing.

You have reality reversed. Those who have experienced the real thing, including a presidential hopeful have publicly objected to these tactics.

Those, like yourself, who are generally dismissive of them tend to be draft dodging cowards like Rush and Cheney. Notice even here that only one of us has served the US in combat, but you are lecturing me about what real soldiers think.

As for the rest, you appear to be confusing extreme Evangelical thought with Catholicism. The Protestant reformation rejected the primacy and role of the Church, the modern Evangelical movement rejects the relevance of Christ’s earthly ministry.

CCC 2313 reflects both, it enforces something that is held to be a fundemental moral imperitive in the written Dogma of the Church and is a clear reflection of Christ’s earthly message.

Free will and freedom of religion premit one to reject both. But in a Catholic forum it seems reasonable to insist that the definition of ‘just war’ be the formal, written, Catholic one, not the GOP’s.

 

[bobzills]

Based on the way that you avoid the other direct questions, this is kind of how I thought you would respond, ie, see and hear only what you want to see and hear.

And so according to Hans Blix, the 700 inspections did not find one single instance of weapons of mass destruction. And according to John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, :“Within the U.S. the main driving force behind the war was a small band of neoconservatives.”
In other words, the blame for the war lies entirely with Bush and with the neoconservatives in the Bush administration who chose to ignore the results found by the United Nations Monitoring Verifications and Inspection Commission.

 

[bobzills]

But in a Catholic forum it seems reasonable to insist that the definition of ‘just war’ be the formal, written, Catholic one, not the GOP’s.

Of course. And as Bishop Botean has so eloquently stated, according to the Catholic definition of a just war, the war in Iraq is most certainly an unjust war.

 

[dmelosi]

And so according to Hans Blix, the 700 inspections did not find one single instance of weapons of mass destruction. And according to John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, :“Within the U.S. the main driving force behind the war was a small band of neoconservatives.”
In other words, the blame for the war lies entirely with Bush and with the neoconservatives in the Bush administration who chose to ignore the results found by the United Nations Monitoring Verifications and Inspection Commission.

And if the proof comes out that there were WMD would that change your mind on blaming Bush?

Why do you blame only Bush when Sadaam himself said that he worked hard to make others believe that he had an ongoing WMD program?