Just War

President Bush is preparing this week to send more troops to Baghdad. Do you believe there is such a thing as a "just war"? Is the Iraq war "just"?
Posted by Sally Quinn and Jon Meacham on January 10, 2007 9:00 AM

Readers’ Responses to Our Question (304)

hsqdxiok iaocq :

vsmr oaigsen vgbqerdc ksqcvizn mkhsbgdve usgcq ajinbemzr

February 15, 2008 8:19 AM | Report Offensive Comments

hsqdxiok iaocq :

vsmr oaigsen vgbqerdc ksqcvizn mkhsbgdve usgcq ajinbemzr

February 15, 2008 8:15 AM | Report Offensive Comments

Limewire Music Downloads :

Hi, my sites:981aad

November 28, 2007 8:26 AM | Report Offensive Comments

Mike 18 :

Thank GOD, You found out something, that this world realy need. http://mike18movies.ifrance.com/

November 3, 2007 9:51 PM | Report Offensive Comments

Rick :

Also in the WP this week: Shock Waves from Syria -Did Israel bomb a secret nuclear facility equipped by North Korea? http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/19/AR2007091901965.html

So the message to the Israelis is, your best bet is to take the next boat for Texas. If you keep this up, someone is sure to lay a few nuclear eggs in Tel Aviv and Haifa.

September 21, 2007 7:08 PM | Report Offensive Comments

Rick :

Also in this week’s WP we see that: Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Thursday an upcoming U.S.-sponsored Mideast conference must be "substantive," and that Israel and the Palestinians must draft a document beforehand that lays "foundations for serious negotiations."

The Palestinians want the conference, tentatively set for November, to yield an outline for a peace deal, complete with a timetable, while Israel wants a vaguer declaration of intent. Key Arab states, such as Saudi Arabia, have said they would only attend if concrete results are achieved. (Fat Chance). http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/20/AR2007092000289.html

September 21, 2007 7:02 PM | Report Offensive Comments

Rick :

As to the question of a just war in Iraq, supposedly central to the war on terror, it is the British and American imperialists who are responsible for the creation of the terrorists in the first place:

For the case of the British, who were being terrorized by Menachem Begin’s Irgun, they should not have caved in and vacated Palestine, leaving it to the terrorists.

Because the British caved in to the terrorist demands, we have had 60 years of uninterrupted war and terror in the so called ‘Holy Land’. Countless thousands of innocents (women and children) have been slaughtered, and millions of families have been driven into refugee camps in neighboring countries.

In the Washington Post we now see that the Israelis are threatening to cut off the Gaza strip’s fuel and electricity. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/19/AR2007091901156.html

September 21, 2007 6:51 PM | Report Offensive Comments

Rick :

The war in Iraq is largely the result of the influence of the Israeli lobby: Wolfowitz, Pearl, Libby, Kristol, etc. Their motivation was to get rid of Sadam Hussein because they viewed him as the main threat to Israel in the region.

So it is appropriate to examine the root cause of the Middle East instability in general. Here is an excerpt from a post from another thread that is also relevent here.

Rick says, the question is:

What's the first thing Tony Blair should do if he wants to make progress as the Quartet's Mideast peace envoy? ("Quit" is not an acceptable answer.)

Since Britain started this whole mess with the Balfour Declaration in 1917, this is a singularly appropriate question.

Zuni says: ‘There never was a legitimate state of Palestine.’

Rick says: True, but following WWI, there was a British Mandate of Palestine that included Palestine and Transjordan, in which Palestine occupied the region now occupied by the illegitimate ‘State of Israel’, the West Bank and Gaza.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Zuni says: ‘What in the hell is illegal and immoral about the Balfour declaration and Jewish, nee Zionist immigration?

Rick says: From Wikipedia ‘The Balfour Declaration of 1917 (dated November 2, 1917) was a classified formal statement of policy by the British government on the partitioning of the Ottoman Empire in the aftermath of the World War I.

The letter stated the position, agreed at a British Cabinet meeting on October 31, 1917, that the British government supported Zionist plans for a Jewish "national home" in Palestine, with the condition that nothing should be done which might prejudice the rights of existing communities there.

So the result was the forceful injection by the Crusaders, of the Zionist Jews, who had been expelled from the region 2000 years ago; they could not coexist in peace with the native population. They had invaded and occupied this region following their great escape from slavery in Egypt; they had a Holier than Thou attitude, and claimed to be God’s chosen people.

Who would have thought that such a Zionist immigration could ever satisfy: ‘the condition that nothing should be done which might prejudice the rights of existing communities’ of Palestine?

The British soon recognized the folly of this policy and attempted to halt the Zionist immigration. They were attacked by a group named Irgun (some call it Etzel), established by the Right-Wing of the Zionist Movement in Palestine and the violent wing of the Zionist movement. The most well-known of these attacks was the King David Hotel bombing which occurred on July 22, 1946. This was a well-planned act engineered by the Irgun's Leader and future Prime Minster, Menachem Begin.

So the Balfour Declaration, and resulting Zionist immigration, was a terrible mistake. The British tried and failed to reverse this terrible decision.

Repercussions of this heinous crime are behind all turmoil and bloodshed in the Middle East including Iraq, Lebanon, Palestinian occupied territories, Syria, Iran etc.

The whole world will never see peace as long as the crime of the 20th century is not corrected.

September 21, 2007 6:36 PM | Report Offensive Comments

pusydfqm peqji :

tecnzxh uinlhkzft dxtvz ljhfvagxc hngazi jnqhawur lqdhzwxc http://www.rpsxi.wtupi.com

September 5, 2007 3:34 AM | Report Offensive Comments

pusydfqm peqji :

tecnzxh uinlhkzft dxtvz ljhfvagxc hngazi jnqhawur lqdhzwxc http://www.rpsxi.wtupi.com

September 5, 2007 3:33 AM | Report Offensive Comments

zthgnlbmx gjnqflzsk :

euzhjbd taeykdxl keicq wasomb znacv vdhw mpoj

September 5, 2007 3:32 AM | Report Offensive Comments

Michele Gargiulo :

War in Irak has been totally injustified and has already costed the file of many hundred of thousand of poor civiltians and few thousands soldiers.
There is a country in the most total mess and nobody has an idea how to contain now this situation.
I am afraid Mr. Bush is just planning to go ahead in search for more petrol for his friends and is looking to Iran. After all the false evidence and proves of Iraq mass destruction arms we start getting now evidence of Iranian arms....
This is an already seen movie!
The mess generated in Iraq is already enough and Mr. Bush is really driving the world in a disaster!
Will a democratic nation like the USA come to action and firmly ask to stop this absurd, criminal war?

February 12, 2007 8:47 PM | Report Offensive Comments

A Hermit :

"...the US has been a very well behaved Super-power historically speaking."

Not sure if Native Americans, the victims of American bombing campaigns in South-East Asia or of their proxies in South and Central America would agree with that observation.

A reading of the history of the United Fruit Company and it's connection to the Mayan genocide in Guatemala may be of interest to you. (This is where the term "banana republic" comes from.) Here's a taste:

http://www.american.edu/ted/ice/peten.htm

http://www.pbs.org/pov/pov2003/discoveringdominga/special_witnessfl.html

Sadly, the Iraq "situation" is not, as you say, the "new norm".


Regards

A Hermit

January 29, 2007 12:26 PM | Report Offensive Comments

Anonymous :

A Hermit once said, "As bad as things were under Saddam the situation is now worse by every possible measure." This is very true. Almost any government is better than chaos.

Before the war looking at America from the outside I was shocked at how unified America was in her march to war. Sure Sadam had it coming and sure he was a fool. He did try to assassinate the first prez. Bush and he can't cry when he's invaded later. And giving cash to the suicide bombers is reason enough to loose your throne.

But wasn't this mess inevitable? Didn't America loose friends? Isn't America divided now? With that many soldiers in high pressure situations wasn't it more likely than not that a certain percent would act like animals and smear the honor of the US?

Even though America wins every engagement and hundreds of foes die for every US soldier the American people never really wanted to kill and be killed. They wanted Sadam out and they jumped at a bad option. I know that America can bear hardship when it is unified in a righteous cause. In WW2 many days she lost more people than in the years of this war combined!

Losing soldiers for an important mission is not the problem. Fighting a war America really didn't think clearly about first and doesn't really want to be in is.

America is not bad. Sadam was. But this is a bad war.

And for you US bashers did Rome, or Parthia, or China, or the Turks, or the Aztecs, or the Assyrians, or the Russians, or the British Empire ever have as much of a power advantage as the US has now? And didn't they act with even less self control than the last 100 yrs. of US history? If this Iraq situation is not the new norm the US has been a very well behaved Super-power historically speaking.

January 26, 2007 11:25 PM | Report Offensive Comments

Soja John Thaikattil, Sydney, Australia :

In the lead up to the Anti-Iraq-War Rally about to begin in Washington in a few hours, 27 January 2007, and announced in advance twice by Washington Post, my final post on this thread:

“The most effective way to love our country (US) is to fight like hell to change it.” – Michael Kazin (in Newsday)

Useful links:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/antiwar/subsection/0,,884056,00.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/weblog/special/0,10627,894156,00.html


January 26, 2007 9:26 PM | Report Offensive Comments

Soja John Thaikattil, Sydney, Australia :

UNITED FOR JUSTICE AND PEACE

With more than 1,400 member groups under its umbrella, United for Peace and Justice (UFPJ) is the nation's largest grassroots peace and justice coalition. Since its founding in October 2002, UFPJ has spurred hundreds of protests and rallies around the country, including the three largest marches against the Iraq war.

http://www.unitedforpeace.org

ANTI-WAR RALLY 27 JANUARY 2007:

On Saturday, 27 January 2007, people from every corner of the country will gather in massive numbers in Washington, DC, to protest the war in Iraq. The pre-march rally will be held on the National Mall, between 3rd Street and 7th Street.

List (subject to change) of scheduled speakers, in alphabetical order:


1. Mayor Rocky Anderson, Salt Lake City, UT

2. Moriah Arnold, 12-year-old sixth grader from Harvard, MA

3. Carlos Arredondo, Gold Star Families for Peace

4. Medea Benjamin, founder of CodePink: Women for Peace

5. Leslie Cagan, National Coordinator, United for Peace and Justice

6. Representative John Conyers (D-MI)

7. Eve Ensler, playwright

8. Jane Fonda, actress/author

9. Kim Gandy, President of the National Organization for Women

10. Danny Glover, actor/activist

11. Reverend Graylan Hagler, Plymouth Congregational Church, Washington, DC

12. Jonathon Hutto, active-duty member of the U.S. Navy

13. Reverend Jesse Jackson, RainbowPUSH Coalition

14. Representative Dennis Kucinich (D-OH)

15. Rabbi Michael Lerner, Tikkun Magazine

16. Kevin Martin, Executive Director, Peace Action

17. Garett Reppenhagen, Iraq Veterans Against the War

18. Tim Robbins, actor/activist

19. Susan Sarandon, actor/activist

20. Eleanor Smeal, Feminist Majority

21. Bob Watada, father of Lt. Ehren Watada, first officer to refuse deployment to Iraq

22. Representative Maxine Waters (D-CA)

23. Representative Lynn Woolsey (D-CA)

24. Ann Wright, retired Army Colonel, former State Dept. diplomat

Music:

1. Emma's Revolution

2. Bedouin - rapper

3. Raging Grannies - from California to New York

January 26, 2007 2:13 AM | Report Offensive Comments

Soja John Thaikattil, Sydney, Australia :

United for Justice with Peace

March on Washington 27 January 2007

http://www.justicewithpeace.org

January 26, 2007 1:50 AM | Report Offensive Comments

Soja John Thaikattil, Sydney, Australia :

Veterans, Military Families, Community Leaders Deliberate on Two Days of Testimony Charging that the Iraq War is Illegal: Citizens’ Panel to Announce Findings Before Watada Court Martial


Tacoma, Washington 20-21 January 2007 - In an unprecedented two-day Citizens’ Hearing held over the weekend, more than 600 citizens joined a distinguished tribunal panel in listening to testimony about the legality of the US invasion of Iraq. The Hearing was convened to present evidence that Lt. Ehren Watada would have presented in his February 5 court martial on the question that the military ruled barred from entry last week — the question of the Iraq War’s legality. Lt. Watada has repeatedly asserted that because the Iraq War is illegal, it is his duty to refuse orders to deploy. He is the Army’s first commissioned officer to take such a stand. Panel Chair David Krieger asserted: “If Lt. Watada cannot get a full hearing about the war’s legality in a military trial, then his case should at least be presented in the court of public opinion. This Citizens’ Hearing was about giving Lt. Watada’s position equal time.”

Many of those who testified, most of whom would have been called to testify at the court martial if the judge had allowed that evidence, agreed that Lt. Ehren Watada had not only the right to refuse to deploy to Iraq in an illegal war, but had a duty to do so. Whether violations of the Nuremberg Principles or the US Constitution, some testifiers asserted that Lt. Watada should be recognized for his courage rather than undergoing a Court Martial.

Panelist Rich Moniak from Juneau, Alaska, whose son served in Iraq and Afghanistan, said during the deliberation: “The testimony presented to me highlighted how this war has failed the Iraqi people and placed our soldiers at risk of being accessories to war crimes.”

Law professors Benjamin G. Davis and Richard Falk agreed that there are clear legal grounds on which the war is illegal. Falk, citing the sections of the US Army Field Manual, emphasized that international law is applicable to the behavior of US soldiers in a times of war and that soldiers have the duty to refuse unlawful commands. Davis sharply criticized the decision of the military judge to not hear Watada’s full defense, stating that Americans have a right to have their defense heard.

The most compelling testimony came from former members of the US military, including five veterans of Iraq. According to Ann Wright, a former Army Colonel and US diplomat who served three and a half decades for the US government, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Powell created the preconditions that led to torture. She added: “We must ensure that members of the US military are not put in the position of being ordered to carry out crimes against humanity.”
Darrell Anderson, who received a Purple Heart for his service in Iraq, talked about a situation he was involved in when orders were issued to “shoot everyone” regardless of whether they were civilians, including children. He stated that they used, what he called, “excessive force.” He said: “I realize it was my duty as a soldier to refuse this illegal war.”

According to Chanan Suarez-Diaz, who also received a Purple Heart for his service in Iraq, the psyched up emotions among the troops resulted in US soldiers taking “trophies” of brain matter from Iraqis they killed and putting such in their refrigerators on base.
Immediately following the closing statements, the panel retired to discuss the testimony, consulting the US Army Field Manual and the Nuremberg Principles. They discussed the testimony until well into the night. Panelist Staughton Lynd, an attorney who holds a PhD in history from Columbia University, said: “The overpowering testimony from Iraq veterans highlighted the conditions that soldiers on the ground are facing.”

Russell McNutt, a veteran of three wars: World War II, Korea, and Vietnam, stated: “I was exposed to a lot of knowledge. The soldiers who served in Iraq that we heard from were facing the dirty end of war. In urban warfare there are no definite boundaries, in different instances the enemy can be in front of you or behind your back. There is a lot of tension about who is a civilian and who is an insurgent. Under those circumstances, instantaneous decisions must be made in responding to threats. Time to exercise discretion is limited, but every effort should be made to ensure innocent bystanders are not injured through the use of deadly force.”

Tribunal organizer Zoltan Grossman commented: “It is the command structure, rather than individual soldiers, that puts enlisted personnel in the position where they feel they have to commit war crimes to survive. The command structure is ultimately responsible for war crimes or crimes against humanity. For example, testimony indicated that the dehumanization of Arabs through the use of racial slurs comes from a systematic training process, not only from individual soldiers’ prejudices or fears.”

Elizabeth Falzone, whose cousin was killed while serving in Iraq, reflected: “The Citizens’ Hearing provided a real venue for citizens to hear from soldiers who are returning from Iraq. Hearing from them and more from family members is especially important with the “surge”, and the repeat deployments that we’re seeing.”

The Citizens’ Hearing and the distinguished panel will release the full report prior to Lt. Watada’s court martial, including the panel’s final statement and excerpts from the testimony. Interviews with panelists or testifiers can be arranged through Cindy Sousa at 206-734-5040 or cindy@sdmcc.org.

There are now video and audio clips on the web site: http://www.wartribunal.org , and more will be available.

Information about Lt. Ehren Watada’s case, his February 5th Court Martial and the mobilization leading up to it, and a video clip of his speech is at http://www.thankyoult.org

January 23, 2007 7:01 PM | Report Offensive Comments

Soja John Thaikattil, Sydney, Australia :

Veterans, Military Families, Community Leaders Deliberate on Two Days of Testimony Charging that the Iraq War is Illegal: Citizens’ Panel to Announce Findings Before Watada Court Martial


Tacoma, Washington 20-21 January 2007 - In an unprecedented two-day Citizens’ Hearing held over the weekend, more than 600 citizens joined a distinguished tribunal panel in listening to testimony about the legality of the US invasion of Iraq. The Hearing was convened to present evidence that Lt. Ehren Watada would have presented in his February 5 court martial on the question that the military ruled barred from entry last week — the question of the Iraq War’s legality. Lt. Watada has repeatedly asserted that because the Iraq War is illegal, it is his duty to refuse orders to deploy. He is the Army’s first commissioned officer to take such a stand. Panel Chair David Krieger asserted: “If Lt. Watada cannot get a full hearing about the war’s legality in a military trial, then his case should at least be presented in the court of public opinion. This Citizens’ Hearing was about giving Lt. Watada’s position equal time.”

Many of those who testified, most of whom would have been called to testify at the court martial if the judge had allowed that evidence, agreed that Lt. Ehren Watada had not only the right to refuse to deploy to Iraq in an illegal war, but had a duty to do so. Whether violations of the Nuremberg Principles or the US Constitution, some testifiers asserted that Lt. Watada should be recognized for his courage rather than undergoing a Court Martial.

Panelist Rich Moniak from Juneau, Alaska, whose son served in Iraq and Afghanistan, said during the deliberation: “The testimony presented to me highlighted how this war has failed the Iraqi people and placed our soldiers at risk of being accessories to war crimes.”

Law professors Benjamin G. Davis and Richard Falk agreed that there are clear