Obama's new 'Just War Peace' policy

No way can a war be called just if children are killed. As to such speeches just scrub the whole thing. I don't want to read or hear any of it even from quoting old saints.

Well despite the Just War and Just Peace rhetoric in the speech, what he actually defended doing is closer to Crusade thinking. Clearly Afghanistan does not pass Just War and Just Peace criteria.

The most significant part of his speech, IMHO, was his recitation of American Exceptionalism (which he did not label, unlike the theories he claims to believe in, but does not follow - this theory is essentially the American version of Crusade theory). We are the "good" nation charged (by God in the origination of the theory, but this is left unstated by Obama and many modern defenders of it) to rescue the rest of the world. The only twist here is Obama's insistence (really not differing much from Bush) that we need to have the cooperation of others. That, of course, is gained largely through pressure and domination.

We will not move forward much until we firmly reject American Exceptionalism, and the corresponding domination and militarism.

Obama insists that what Gandhi and King did is not realistic for him to do, but provides no deep analysis of this. There is no indication he has seriously considered such an option. He seems a total captive of conventional American wisdom.

Read "War Made Easy." America has been in the grip of the military-industrial complex since 1950 and no President since, or Congress has had the courage to stop the carnage or the funding. Our people have become comfortable with endless War and our kids keep jumping off the cliff like lemmings. We are a modern-day Sparta,

There is no just war.War is the ultimate terror.Only defending yourself against the attackers (and the attackers only)or against those who have driven you out of your home can be justified. Obama does not deserve any prize because he is allowing the killing to go on. He is a hostage of the military-industrial complex but this does not releave him from the responsibility for the crimes committed.

je suis pacifiste de jésus-christ, mais là vous devez soutenir le président des états-unis et secouer les puces des européens.
Ben laden a donné l'irak à bush c'est pour cela que la guerre continue. Que Dieu est pitié de nous et du peuple afghan.
Beaucoup de masques vont tomber pendant cette guerre.

Aidez-nous car Vichy revient en France. Merci au président américain que le Seigneur le guide et le préserve de toutes attaques physiques et spirituelles.

I'm reading a universe of hopelessness in so many comments about the future of America.
America has at least one reason to be hopeful. We have a president who will reluctantly finish an unpopular war (I hate it) and he, in the same speech, offered a scenario for a united world effrt to reign in troubled governments without war. That's not bad for starters.
The man has only been in office less than a year.

The problem with a "just" war is that you can delude yourself into thinking anything is "just". Remember the Republican logic on shredding the Geneva Convention because the combatants didn't have a uniform on. If invading a sovereign country under false pretenses isn't an unjust war, what is? I'm starting to believe the definition of an unjust war is one that the other guy starts.

Just "War and Peace"
Few American officials were ever willing to discuss the topic of "just war", especially the previous U.S. administration. President Obama's speech in Oslo, Norway, touched upon not only the "just war" but also the "just peace", and linked these two into just "war and peace", extraordinarily exceptional.

Certainly, "just war" has preconditions as is well known, and one of the key elements in that is "winnability" of the war waged, whether defined narrowly as a military action, or on a broader scope, winning the "hearts and souls" along with the much easier military actions.

In other words, if fighting a war, militarily, that is destined "not winnable", one may not want to send soldiers to sacrifice. And if militarily winnable, one would seriously develop, preferably in advance, what the next steps should be, to build "just peace" in stages from basic needs to fundamental rights to become a responsible international community member, namely natural evolution of "just peace" based on developments, instead of preying after military conquests.

It's a good time to look into these and other related issues with international partners, in coordinated cooperations, constructively and consistently.

http://think-tanks.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!B2173AD7CACC6DC9!243.entry

There haven't been many years since 1776 that we haven't been at war. Afganistan is rooted in 9/11, which is rooted in Israel, which is rooted in WWII, which was rooted in WWI.

We need to justify peace in Israel to clean all this up. The only way to do this is to support the Palestine's right to sovereignty. We need to offer to send in troops to protect their right to the land that they controlled for hundreds of years, their right to a contigueous border, their right to freedom, democracy, freedom of association and free trade.

It's been a long 8 years as the World heard President Bush proudly call himself a War President. He believed in pre emptive invasions and murdering innocent people. He publicly said he wise he was a Dictator so he wouldn't have to be dealing with Law Makers or the US Constitution. Well that seems to be what the American people really want as the attacks continue against President Obama who is looking for Peace and following the US Constitution. What is more interesting is the GOP Law Makers have no clue what the US Constitution says nor does most Americans. Even those who are in the Media/Press have no idea what the Bill of Rights/US Constitution/ DeClartion of Independence says.

War does not create peace. The two does not combine at any point. If we cannot live together in peace we certainly will not at war. It is a horrible thing for men to desire war, to send our young off to surrender their lives, and for what. In todays' advance in technology, there should also be an advancement in humanitarian efforts. Are we to be seen as beast of the field? America has moved forward in all aspects of a better existence, it should be to our best interest to get others to do likewise by peaceful means. I believe it is possible, but only if all people are recognized as human beings.I fear if America continues on this path someday the slaughter will be in this country and nobody will cry for us. Our great generosity is not enough to prove we are human.

Obama hit it right on the head with his speech. You can't negotiate with an organization headed by one guy who was inspired by a half-crazed Imam from the fringe of Salafist Islam and another guy who was partially responsible for the killing of Anwar Sadat. The only thing you can do is kill them before they kill more Americans, because there's no chance they will allow themselves to be arrested and put on trial. Wyatt Earpp is the operative hero in this case, not Martin Luther King or Gandhi. If there was ever a more legitimate basis for the application of American military force overseas since the end of the second world war, I've never seen it in my lifetime of 54 years.

War is not a part of peace any more than night is a part of day.

If a nation is at war, then it is not at peace.

This bad idea of "just peace" is born from out nation's deep sense of being able to "have it all". We as a nation think we can eat what we want and stay thin, spend as much as we want and still be rich, work as much as we want and have "quality time" with family.

Wage war and have peace.

"Just Peace" is just bunk.

Our nation is on the cusp of losing the last of its status as a "just nation" to broker the peace.

Germany and Japan were stripped of their ability to wage war because they abused their military power in WWII.

America ended that great war, and thus was given great responsibility as the nation that can be trusted to keep the peace.

Since being given that responsibility, we have gone from one war to another.

If we continue to attack other nations, we will be looked upon not as a "just nation" to trust, but as a violent nation to fear.

Neither Obama or America wants peace. Our entire economy is based on war, and has been since the beginning of WW II. Whatever happens to us we deserve, because "we" are the terrorists threatening world peace, not the other guys!

Give him a chance? He's had a dozen chances and blown all of them! He took care of the bankers instead of the workers, he's still renditing prisoners, torture is still going on, we're still in Iraq and Afghanistan is about to become Vietnam. The fact is he's had plenty of chances. Just another lying, worthless politician. They all make me puke. The military industrial complex has bought off yet another one. Looks like they got what they paid for too!

The only thing that is more full of bull than this article is the speech Obama gave in Norway. The only thing more full of bull than that speech, is his Afghanistan policy where he tries to please everyone. So far he's either lied or equivocated at every opportunity to make changes. The fact that Palin and McCain liked his speech says more than I ever could. I hope he enjoys the drubbing he's going to take in 2012 when real Democrats like me just stay home on election day!

There also is something to be said for "peace through strength" and strength in numbers.

It takes two to make peace but only one to take it away.

Posted by: bobmoses: Typical partisan liberal crap: "Bush bad, Obama good".
====================================

Well, Bob, I know you are attempting to deride the writer with the label of "liberal crap." But at least you reached the right conclusion, according to the evidence so far (Bush bad, Obama good). Bush never got it. Obama has a chance to get it right even tho' everyone understands he's not perfect. Give the guy a chance!

I think the idea of a just peace deserves attention, but think President Obama has only raised the issue. His analysis looks rather brief and superficial.

Obama translation:

Obama will conduct war and recieve a peace prize, because they are as stupid as Wright was.
Rule # 1
Never trust and NPD Sociopathic dual profile ( they lie )

Rule #2 Repeat rule numvber one.

by the way, if someone wants to talk about this further, there might be someone waiting for you after registering at ageromance.com~~you'll be surprised!!

Has America been interested in peace it would have first tightened the screw of weapon industry lobby who keeps on pressurizing white house and pentagon for wars and conflicts. An economy based on sale of weapons can not listen to peace advice.

God save world from American politicians who are bunch of war mongers, who love to spill innocent blood and cover their sin by calling the loss of lives of innocent people as Collateral damage”.

America is guilty of spreading wars, hatred among diff religious groups and countries to achieve its evil goals. American leadership has very easily fooled its masses by scaring them of Osama bin laden (a product of their own CIA) and so called Alqaeda (which does not even exist). All those groups who are giving bloody noses to Yankees in Iraq and Afghanistan are all home grown jihadist whose ambition is to kick the invaders out of their countries which is butchering innocent civilians using bombs, missiles and drones.

Watch this youtube video which is a proof that how inmates were treated in Guantanamobay

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_50_PCq1T0&feature=related

Typical partisan liberal crap: "Bush bad, Obama good". How tedious and how deeply out of touch with the reality of international affairs.

As usual, "OnFaith" has nothing to do with faith at all. Instead it is yet another forum for hyper-partisan liberals to bleat the same talking points you find on hundreds of sites. Let's stop pretending that this blog has anything to do with faith at all.

Truth be known, Obama and Hu should have shared the prize for all our hopes in the world for the world. Both men envision Peace and Prosperity. Both are wise and both share an understanding we have little time for tribalism superiority campaigns.

They know we have no time to drop our differences and put our heads to the grindstone and solve our mutual problem of destroying the Co2 that will kill us all, if we play it small and throw stuff when we should be throwing life lines to the sick and starving while we retool the world for Green Energy in less than a decade.

We must be become as One in mind and body to coodinate the most massive endeavor ever undertaken in all mankind's history if we are to survive as a species.

Come together as humans and all the rest will follow.

The prize is we survive!

Thanks to Prof. Thistlethwaite for thought provoking insight. The political, practical and philosophical were all present in Obama's speech. As a practical matter, he inherited an enormous bunch of disasters from Bush, including a meekly prosecuted war in Afghanistan. As one who was vociferously against the invasion of Iraq, the Afghan situation is different and troubling.

While the best way to defeat terrorists is to provide a better life for people so that terrorists have no real base, that's a long term thing. I fear that we have stepped into the middle of a long standing civil war where the majority Pushtuns have repeatedly got the short end of the stick and are more sympathetic to the Taliban because of their lack of power. It doesn't help that it looks like we have a puppet government and we kill civilians with our advanced technology. So I'm willing to give Obama the benefit of the doubt for now. I think he is headed in the right direction, but the simmering feuds of the ages in Afghanistan will likely take longer than the road back from economic depression. I wish the President well on both counts.

The president, his political planners and military leaders are unable or unwilling to admit we've been wasting our time, money and lives for the last five or six years in Afghanistan.

No matter what he said in Oslo, it sounded like intellectual self-abuse - a complete waste of time. A just war is any war I say is a just war.

This so-called war or occupation of Afghanistan is an unmitigated disaster for out national economy and long-term national defense. It is just going agitate and inflame the Muslim world against us and recruit more terrorists.

We are still the guys in the white hats, even if the Liberal apologists want to grant moral equivalency to the Al Qaeda and allied murderers of innocents.

Posted by: honorswar26 | December 13, 2009 3:41 PM
*******************************************
That comment is not only offensive, it crosses the border from opinion to lying. As a Liberal, the only moral equivalency with Al Queda I will grant to the poster is his own inclination to create mortal enemies out of straw in order to justify his own treasonous inclination towards political jihad in America. Chances are, he's a coward as well, but that's just my *opinion*.

What I wonder if whether any of the ministers in churches where presidents presiding over needless, unnecessary wars have ever dared speak any criticisms of their military interventions that led to the deaths of thousands of innocent people. Somehow I doubt so, and if they are silent, this speaks volumes as to the moral bankruptcy of "religion" among many.

I don't understand the fundamentalists that say all war is bad. My opinion is that reality is more complicated and has more colors than black and white.

That being said, I agree with Obama and Bush. The problem for Obama is that he got the Afghans and Bush got the Iraqis (for their surges). I'm not an expert, but the Afghans seem an order of magnitude less civilized (as a populous).

What if we spent a trillion right now on the environmental problems we face or education, water wells and houses?
How may enemies would we have if we acted as People Of Peace. What a legacy this would make.
You can catch more flies with honey than vinegar.
Simple arithmetic, kindness equals Peace, violence brings anguish, pain and bitter men with revenge on their minds.

We've heard all of this many times before. The 'Pax Romana',divide and conqueor, kill and maim, subjugate and call it winning.

Did he go to Sunday School or not?
There is no justification for War. Why is it we who carry the Roman Banner as if it were our own.
Not since Geoffrey de Bouillion ran naked, sword in hand slayin Christians, Jews and Muslim to take the Holy Sceptre in Jerusalem have the Crusades lasted for long. In the Muslim mind, it is the same enemy that was in de Boullion.
What rights to we have that allow us to Lord it over others, except our military might and that was meant to defend us, not conqueor others.
Islam's call is the same as before, off with your heads heathens or convert before us.

Have it your way and dream of the dead and mutilated for the rest of your life. Being President not escuse from pergatory for taking a life is a sin in any land. Whether it be to defend or attack, killing is wrong and many will pay the price, and that is only the begining.Wait 10 or 20 years and all the faces of your victim will be there drinking tea while you witness the flesh falling off limbs and two miles of burn victim cooridors for the rest of their lives.

I read Obama's speech also and I didn't see it at all like what you did. It was indeed a statement on how America has kept the peace with the blood of its men and women in uniform and its force of arms. What he did say is that other nations (and non-state entities) must choose to give up the use of arms to try to enforce THEIR will upon others. Obama's speech sounded more like something that W's speechwriters would have written. It spoke on how America may not be perfect, but its ideals still are an order of magnitude higher than those that it is fighting. We are still the guys in the white hats, even if the Liberal apologists want to grant moral equivalency to the Al Qaeda and allied murderers of innocents.

More adulatory nonsense from an Obama cult member. Spinning the same old warism as Change is intellectually irresponsible and morally reprehensible.

Barack has lost his way, seduced by men in uniform. He is rationalizing whatever the dashing young generals from West Point tell him. I campaigned and voted for Obama. I don't regret it (yet), but the West Point and the Nobel speeches deeply disgusted me.

It Pax Americana. Call it as you like, but dont count on others, civilised or not, to accept it.

I would like to see the Nobel prize go to the many great human rights workers and organizations around the world where the prestige of the award and the money would actually do some good. The peace prize is squandered on heads of state. Concerning President Obama, I don't expect the person in charge of the world's most powerful military force to be a pacifist. Still, Obama lost my support with his attempt to justify the Afghan war. A previous Nobel winner understood war much better than the President. "The promises of the Great Society have been shot down on the battlefields of Vietnam," said Martin Luther King, Jr. in 1967. Will the creation of millions of necessary jobs, the rebuilding of our own country, the restoration of the environment, and the relief of poverty here, in a land where 1 out of 4 children need government aid simply to eat -- will all of this be shot down on the battlefields of Afghanistan? Obama's eloquence in this case is nothing but an eloquent disgrace.

The President said that the "old architecture" of thinking about war and peace is "buckling."

Yes the new thinking is that war and peace are simply part of the campaign.

In early 2012 the President will bring 20,000 of these American troops home with assurances that by 2014 it will be possible to bring home almost all of the American troops from Afghanistan.

One requires no inside sources, or access to confidential information. All that is required is awareness that all actions of the President and his administration are part of the campaign for reelection in 2012.

In many cases the actions of the President and government can be determined in advance by simply looking at the calendar of the President to see which reelection campaign event is scheduled next.

Religion is nothing more than a collection of the ignorant rituals and superstitions of cavemen.
The "faithful" are nothing more than the mindless idiots that perpetuate the ignorance and intolerance of ancient times.
This is the 21st century folks. Stop perpetuating ignorance. The earth wasn't created 6,000 years ago and there are no imaginary sky daddies. Snap out of it. Try adding a little reality to your life.

If only Adam had not been seduced into eating that apple, we would have had all these eons and eons nothing but peace. Unfortunately, Adam was seduced and so are most of the writers here including Ms Thistlewaite.

Peace will come only we collectively put aside the fear of others that leads to contempt and hatred and war.

Cesspool of Heroin and Opium Addicts pretending to be leaders of people are no more than what you find in Little Tokyo, the Tenderloin districts in America.
Sad,destitute lost souls wandering along mountains of Never-Neverland. Why would we waste our resources within such a land?
Barack lost his touch with his soul when he decided to pursue the monster machines of destruction instead of the Lamb of Peace.
We will weep with our arrogance and ploys that bring nothing to no one, except the rich get richer. Obama take the money back from the vacumn of idolarty that worships itself from high storied buildings. Feeling safe and secure, they say sure, spend the money and take the lives. War was never the answer, not ever. How long will we bear these scars? The ones that linger and haunt the mind of what were once, innocents. Until they saw body blown apart.
The call to Mecca is a sham and to pretend it was ever anything other than a notice to convert or lose your head is as true today as it was 1500 years ago. When a man rode on his horse slaughtering and killing to prove his God was better than anyone's else.
The Horsemen of the Apocalypse are riding steady to end the feeble efforts of man to bring salvation and peace. Let the meek, the animals rule the land. We are not worthy enough to love only kill. We seek suffering for others as they rot on a cot outside the Emergency room.
War...............will only bring what it always has, death and bitterness and revenging sons strart all over again and again.
We see the enemy and he is not over there, but in front of our eyes, we breath in the rot that will kill us all. Our own blindness to the foul stench we make basking in our greed, the need to pollute all we touch.
Afterall, we are just animals.

To quote a part of MLK's speech,"Beyond Vietnam", "the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today---my government". The more things change, the more they remain the same. It is insulting to have Obama quoting King and Ghandi while looking for excuses to escalate the war in Afghanistan!

There probably couldn't be a more apt time to discuss "Just Peace" thinking than after 7 years of the nearly absurd Iraq occupation. 7 years into the conflict, no one, absolutely no one, can render an argument whereby the invasion of Iraq and its Trillion dollar price tag makes any sense. Yet history has several startling, irrefutable, examples where peaceful pursuit of reconciliation accomplished faster and more lasting results than any armed conflict: Ghandi, our own civil rights history, The Amsterdam treaty that brought peace to Ireland. If you missed this point: "practice norms" -- actions that can be undertaken to increase the likelihood that peace will develop and be sustained." then you miss the point of this article and of the President's speech. One can make an argument for the Just Peace approach, not just because it's more "peaceful", but because it simply works better, and results in less economic cost, not to mention senseless death. Put another way: "do it because it's less stupid, stupid."

"Just peace" language is not an Obama doctrine, the very notion of which is highly arrogant, but more Obama propaganda. Has there ever been a leader in human history who did not try to justify their wars as being "just" and "necessary?"

Since nearly all, if not all, leaders have said their wars were "just," any "objective" criteria on what constitutes a just war does not exist. The two wars and sanctions against Iraq led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people, especially children. Were these truly "just" wars and sanctions? Or was oil the main motivation for war?

Obama arrogantly claims his war in Afghanistan is a "just" and ":necessary" war. Yet if the war is as "necessary" as he says, he should be sending several hundred thousand troops to invade western Pakistan. Since he has no intention of doing so his rationale for his war and it being a "just" war ring false and hollow.

"A just war?"... BS. Obama is more than a little weak in the St. Augustine just war theory department.

When did Afghanistan or the Taliban attack us? We went into Afghanistan on a punitive mission to get Bin Laden. He hasn't been there for years. So why are we?

We're propping up Karazai-the-corrupt who says he needs us for the next 14 years or so. And-- would we please foot the bill for his army/police force while he plays commercial footsie with the Chinese?

Why are we in the business of force feeding democracy to a people for whom democracy is an anathema and defending an oligarch? Our people are dying to create a democracy for Muslims, the majority of whom don't care enough to fight for it themselves unless they are paid as much as the Taliban. What part of "bad deal" doesn't this administration understand?

Obama feels good to be needed and hasn't said "no."

Before there is worldwide peace, the people of the world have to learn heartfelt forgiveness. Too many people live in the past and judge others according to past memories. Just look at our posts here. Before humans can look forward and progress to peace and cooperation, they must forgive and let go of the past.

Another puff-"peace". We've found a new way, a 3rd way, a 4th way. It's all so magical and new. The only thing that is missing is the rigor of logic so much more evident in Aquinas, and predictably missing from Obama.

Is Obama arguing that peace is JUSTifiable only under certain conditions. What foolishness.

"Just Peace theory actually outlines how you get to "lasting peace." Do tell.

Did you know that you can actually get thinner by eating a lot of food?

Did you know that we can actually fix our deficit problem by spending more?

Oy...are we ever in a fix with writers like this.

I remember so many other sycophants of Bill Clinton trying to express how his presidency really was NEW.

"A just war?"... BS. Obama is more than a little weak in the St. Augustine just war theory department.

When did Afghanistan or the Taliban attack us? We went into Afghanistan on a punitive mission to get Bin Laden. He hasn't been there for years. So why are we?

We're propping up Karazai-the-corrupt who says he needs us for the next 14 years or so. And-- would we please foot the bill for his army/police force while he plays commercial footsie with the Chinese?

Why are we in the business of force feeding democracy to a people for whom democracy is an anathema and defending an oligarch? Our people are dying to create a democracy for Muslims, the majority of whom don't care enough to fight for it themselves unless they are paid as much as the Taliban. What part of "bad deal" doesn't this administration understand?

Obama feels good to be needed and hasn't said "no."

The reality is Obama inherited Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan's chaos. He didn't seek the Nobel Peace Prize, but has to deal with the repercussions from it. His handling of withdrawal from these unnecessary wars is a delicate matter. The terrorists have grown here and abroad because of the initial response from the Bush Administration; just what Osama bin Laden wished for. As you may remember, bin Laden also claimed as the center of financial businesses in New York fell, so would our financial stability; the cost of going to war, etc., He knew Bush would do just that. I have often wondered if when the whole world was aching with us for our loss at the Twin Towers we offered a substantial reward for the capture of bin Laden what would have happened to our world when he was turned over to us, and I'm certain he would have been. But, we have to deal with what is. President Obama's pragmatic approach, intellect, and thoughtfulness will prevail; we just have to give him time. It is stunning that with all he has to undertake, the economy, housing, jobs, wall street, health insurance reform, Gitmo, torture, America's image, etc., etc., his tasks are multiplied by the obstructionism he has had to endure in all these areas. Patience is difficult in times like these. But, I see a President who is multitasking and trying very hard to make the right decisions.

911 was carried out by a renegade, criminal element, that sought sanctuary in Afghanistan and Pakistan. We have attacked and largely decimated that criminal element. What's left is the Taliban. Our goal, to defeat them and install a democratic government, is not necessary nor justified any longer by 911. If this (Taliban) is the government the people of Afghanistan want, what right do we have to tell them otherwise? Good and evil? America commits evil everyday. Everyday an American made bullet is fired by an Israeli soldier at Arab children in Gaza. Everyday a child in Indonesia can't go to school because she works in a sweatshop that provides a U.S. company with cheap merchandise. Time to get off the "high horse."

The President is doing all the right stuff in a honorable manner of speech and thinking.Everything will be alright,it's still too early about the success of his great effort and rhetoric.Give the President the time for crying out loud,we voted for bush & cheney twice,and looked what they did to Uncle Sam,maybe palin can answer me huh?

Professor Thistlethwaite's essay is a breath of fresh air. What passes for the political left in the US seems actually to be of the opinion that, since Obama hasn't delivered single-payer universal health care and withdrawn every American soldier from Iraq and Afghanistan he must be punished by allowing the likes of a Sarah Palin to win the Presidency in 2012. Yeah. That'll learn him.

How I long for a return to the American left of the 1930s, a left at had the ability to prioritize, think in the long term, and avoid ideological pass/fail litmus tests that render them about as effective a force in contemporary politics as the Klan.

In other words: When Woody Guthrie wrote "This machine kills fascists" on the top of his guitar, he was writing about the Taliban.

We finally have a US President gifted enough to see the world for the complex place it is. Here's a novel idea, how about we support him?

While the emphasis on "Just Peace" is an important contribution to the discussion, the declaration of a "Just War" is problematic. Every war, from the standpoint of those who wage them, has been declared "just." Even Hitler, Stalin and Mao declared their wars "just," according to their own criterion, and therein lies the problem: when those who declare wars are allowed to define what is "just" or "injust," as they say, "the one who makes the rules usually wins the game." Every leader who has gone to war since the time of Augustine has found his rules burdensome - as they are meant to be. President Obama is no different. President Obama does not get to define what a Just War is. Neither the war in Iraq nor the one in Afghanistan qualifies.

As to the acceptance of the Nobel Prize, a president involved in two wars - one not of his choosing, but one also which he is escallating, should not be accepting the Nobel Prize. It would have been more respectful of the prize, more meaningful, and more honorable, if he had said, "I hope someday to be worthy of this prize," and then turned it down.

Unless one is in the business of profitting from war, it would be folly to argue against the choice of "peace" over "war". However, in choosing peace one does not have to desert one's defences should war become necessary. It is not President Obama's desire for peace that is the question; it is his apparent desire for disarmament before peace is on the horizon.

If we go back to the book of Genesis, we will see a duality in just about everything: man/woman; good/bad; good/evil; day/night etc. Suggesting peace over war, would be similar to suggesting love over hate or good over evil. It does not mean that war, peace, evil etc will disappear.

For those who are really concerned about the existence of good and evil together, I suggest recall of the fact that the "tree of knowledge of good and evil" was planted in the Garden of Eden before the existence of Adam and Eve. I will also refer them to Isaiah 45: 5-8 in the King James official version.

I believe that war will always remain a diplomatic choice. It is how we exercise that choice that would determine whether peace will eventually reign.

Is COMPLETELY agree with Farnaz1.... Utterly dreadful hogwash...
Ms.THISTLETHWAITE, IF you want Chimpy Bush or Darth Cheeney's philosophies back, go live in Dallas..You'll get plenty, and Karl will be there to help you get a full load. BUT, it's time to REJECT what these clowns have wrought; send them to the Hague with Tony Blair to stand trial for WAR CRIMES, and stop hating the rest of the world outwardly...

Stupidity and naiveté of others has brought us to this point - you're just helping that point of view to live one more hour...Let it go..you'll feel better tomorrow...

From Pope Urban and the Crusades to President Obama's "just war", the bottom line has always been to serve the rich and powerful --in today's America, the corporations engaged in making obscene profits from war and related acvities.

Re-introduction of military draft would promptly bring the war to an end. But that is not going to happen. Our elected representatives who support war(s) are in the pockets of lobbyists.

seductress susan is in denial about a brutal truth. holy war is good, especially the offensive war on corrupt cops and "conflict resolution" social workers aka the war on terror.

how many liberal Congo police commissioners wear a poosy scalp necklace over their uniform?

just rest in peace oslo.

The teaching on war and peace establishes a strong presumption against war which is binding on all; it then examines when this presumption may be overriden, precisely in the name of preserving the kind of peace which protects human dignity and human rights.

St. Augustine was impressed by the fact and the consequences of sin in history - the "not yet" dimension of the kingdom. In his view war was both the result of sin and a tragic remedy for sin in the life of political societies. War arose from disordered ambitions, but it could also be used, in some cases at least, to restrain evil and protect the innocent. The classic case which illustrated his view was the use of lethal force to prevent aggression against innocent victims. Faced with the fact of attack on the innocent, the presumption that we do no harm, even to our enemy, yielded to the command of love understood as the need to restrain an enemy who would injure the innocent.

Just-war teaching has evolved as an effort to prevent war.

Only if war cannot be rationally avoided, does the teaching then seek to restrict and reduce its horrors. It does this by establishing a set of rigorous conditions which must be met if the decision to go to war is to be morally permissible. Such a decision, especially today, requires extraordinarily strong reasons for overriding the presumption in favor of peace and against war. This is one significant reason why valid just-war teaching makes provision for conscientious dissent. It is presumed that all sane people prefer peace, never want to initiate war, and accept even the most justifiable defensive war only as a sad necessity. Only the most powerful reasons may be permitted to override such objection.

Mr. Obama's West Point declarations as well as his Nobel Prize acceptance speech cannot map onto what is happening the just war permission.

Augustin's Just War Theory was meant to minimize the damage of warfare. Christians were first and foremost pacifists, and were co-opted to fight when Constantine made the Christianity the State religion. Augustin recognized some contradictions and tried to reconcile them. Any Just War Theory gets thrown out the window with modern warfare, where non combatants take the brunt of the conflict. Weapons of Mass Destruction like nuclear weapons would certainly not be allowed, and neither would drones. How much civilian death and suffering did we cause after the deaths of the 3000 innocents on 9/11? Was and is it religiously justifiable? I don't think so.

Here's the thing: We've been down this path before: Korea, Viet Nam, Haiti, Lebanon and all the places the CIA went into like Iran, a covey of South American countries and the like. In each adventure, we 'won' something...for short-term US business interests...but lost far more for in the long term. Viet Nam went Communist...and still is, Korea is still divided, Rumsfeld sold lethal gas precursers to Saddam, Lebanon recovered despite us to the extent that it has a functioning central government, Haiti is still a mess and South America is still regaining its foothold. Add to all that the fact that Afghanistan has never been conquered or administered or changed for the better by any outside force in over a thousand years.

Part two of the discussion concerns the fact that the vast majority of nations on earth have some kind of US military presence. Supposedly, the presence of US forces at a Saudi airbase is what set Bin Laden off. Other than the 'hot war' places, we are not in a defensive or offensive stance. In short, we don't belong in those places. Discussions about strategic placement of forces are unimpressive.

Part three of the discussion concerns the fact that we are de facto broke due to our huge military expenditures which are, in total, more than all other nations on earth, and the adventures that they engender. (I have a theory that indicates that some of our weapons have expiration dates and our military is 'saving money' for us by using them...but I could be wrong.)

I get something from this: We are just dumb. Obama is not getting it. We spend, shoot people in the name of 'justice' or 'democracy' or somesuch and thereby shoot ourselves in the foot as a consequence. The old saw about those who do not study history are bound to repeat it rings exactly true. If we stop pissing people off with these de facto occupations and our economic imperialism, maybe we can be both rich and safe.

Non-resistance to evil-doers, and I include Al-Qaeda and other islamic fanatic groups in that category, will certainly lead to peace. But many of us will die as a result. Ghandi's non-resistance worked because he was dealing with the English, who, despite their faults, were a civilized people. Try that with Al-Qaeda and the Taliban and we are dead peacemakers. Even the soft-headed Obama recognizes that.

Is war necessary, or not? If left to their own devices, would the folks in Afghanistan eventually become a threat to our country, or others? How about the religious political violence stuff? Is that worth a war, an occupation? Cheap oil? How about liberty, and not having people from other countries trying to tell us how to live? What's really worth fighting about? How much of the war is just about money?

What is war? Why is there war? If we can answer that question, then maybe one day, we'll get closer to peace, in some parts of the world, as well as in this country.

Yes, I agree with President Obama. I am eager for the Afghan war to be finished. I believe President Obama is our greatest asset in the quest to have a more just and peaceful world. I like his clarity and his skills in the area of diplomacy.

..; Laying down as lambs within a pack of wolves is not a viable answer.
Posted by: DDilegge

If one walks away from the wolves, and latches the gates to the borders closed for 3 years, the pack moves away or starves itself.

Peace does not mean the absence of conflict; whether that is military or verbal combat. And, that choice is left to our enemies - foreign and domestic. Wars are also fought to relieve human suffering.

People running around in bathrobes, with towels on their heads, wearing flip flops, that live in huts with no electricity or plumbing, who drive 2 wheeled carts stoned out of their gourds on black tar heroine, are not going to change.

Just because Obama conducts war by killing the village to save the village, doesn't mean that the Russians didn't do the same thing there, until they went broke. Peace would mean no one is wasting assets there.

This war is an attack on the USA by Obama, more than anything else.
What a fraud this NPD sociopathic dual profile is. Obamajoker face ( Heath Ledger style) spent my tax dollars to go get his fake accolade.
It is time to take the Keys to Airforce one away.

Sunday, December 13, 2009

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Sunday shows that 23% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Forty-two percent (42%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -19.

2010 & 12 CANNOT COME SOON ENOUGH!!

In many ways, this is an updated Wilsonianism - though Wilson never quite used the language of 'just' peace.

As an aside - it kills me to read commentary on how we - the U.S. - have declared a "Holy War". If anything, we have been in denial that someone else has declared a holy war on us. So what to do? Our enemies are fighting a holy war against us and we should bring a knife to a gun fight? We need to get on the same sheet of music as our adversaries - anything else is foolish and very, very dangerous.

Who doesn't desire peace? Well, our die-hard extremist enemies for one. So, how do we reconcile this dilemma? Laying down as lambs within a pack of wolves is not a viable answer.

Obama has got it wrong... In his efforts for change, he's repeating the same insane policies as his predecessor. He is attempting to insure the right that he has as big a balls as they do, by continuing THEIR insanity...

Don't you think that Obama's 'brilliant', passionate, speech, extolling the wonderfulness and moral need for continuing war has a meaning? Well, I do.

After 230 years, Obama has created America's first Holy War.

"Different dog, same fleas" Gordon Gecko

Just Peace is music to my ears,way to go Barry.Even the new infuse of troops is to sustain,peace,in the long run.Happy days/nights are here again,Thumbs up!!

bala.

The only just war is the War on Poverty or a war on war. All else is just war propaganda. Truth is the first casualty in war. Obama, the current Hypocrite in Chief, has once again demonstrated that truth.

I will admit that as an Obama suppoter I have been having reservations about the urgency for change that I thought we would get. On the other hand, I recognize he is much smarter than I and so I continue to live in hope. I cannot help but be amused at a few of the respondents who do not see the irony in the fact that they would never be able to get an appointment with a senior executive of a major corporation, or the Pope, or a high official of any church, but who claim they talk daily to the creator of the Universe - and he answers back. Well, maybe they do.

This is yet another example of Obamaspeak - he campaigned against the war yet is committing more troops while accepting a peace prize; he said he would tax the rich and still hasn't - instead he has looked after the rich namely Wall Street/financials with bailouts; he said he would regulate the financial industry and still hasn't. He is no leader and I'm sure people regret voting for him. Only thing is, with 2 parties it's always the lesser of the two evils.

To the person that removed post: I forget one poison: intolerance of other views.
Chao

Seriously, I am baffled at Obama! I do not think he knows what he believes!! Fear that he is nothing more than a Chicago developed; socialist educated; 'deep pocket' socialist funded; brand that articulates whatever the teleprompter says!!

...And now, we are living with it!! A "Just Peace"? "A Just War"? Think it really depends on what day of the week it might be, and the audience that is listening!!

This guy has done NOTHING HIS FIRST YEAR IN OFFICE, other than discourage business, and cause many to consider moving -- even their small businesses -- to other countries!!

He seems to have outsources policy to Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid!! HOW IS THAT WORKING FOR YOU???

We Earthlings are the ones that didn't come out good with the cookie cutter. As dysfunctional creational mutants, we were exiled on this distant, celestial Molokai island called Earth so we could progressively, but surely grind ourselves into extinction. All the needed tools were placed here at our disposal: religion, war, pestilence, racism, persecution, discrimination, crime, torture, poverty, envy, dishonesty, Dictators, terrorists, suicide bombers and nuclear fission.
There must be lots of civilizations out there where intelligent beings exist free of these poisons. They are watching us and they will be free of us soon.

Who will decide what is "Just".
The few idiots, the Security Council or the U.N General Assembly.

The wild beast kills for his survival and so do the super-power.

First learn the truth then do the justice.

The president is exactly right. Can we really sit down and ignore we were attacked on American soil and thousands of innocent people lost their lives. How do you turn your face away from that and ignore it or say oh we want peace kill who you wish.

How many attacks and lives lost do the American people and critics need? I don't know if we are becoming a country of babbling idiots or just selfish greedy narrow minded degenerates with only a limited amount of intelligent individuals in the country. One thing that is becoming clearer is the enemy within.

President Obama has no backbone but can give you nice and high quality TV shows or enterviews to sing you a lulluby.

The question raised here is not just war or just peace. This is Rovian and NeoCon BS. He was elected because millions wanted him to bring a CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN, as they were more than fed up with this kind of bull.

He not only did not alter the NeoCon agenda, but is rather enhancing it (about 55,000 more troops in AfPak.)

He will be remembered as a liar and a renegade.

I won't be surprised if he attacked Iran, if another general a la McChrystal held a conference asking fo an immediate attack . He has proved to salute to any unkown general, and salute and shout : YES SIR! While it's usually the other way around.

Politics as usual. And the man is just another carpetbagger who promised a lot and is now giving the finger to those who trusted him on his word.

Obama makes a good point: there are times when pacificism will not overcome tyranny. St. Augustine analyzed St. Matthew's admonition regarding "turning the other cheek" and admitted that at certain times, when, for example the barbarians were ready to rape and pillage innocents, that turning the other cheek amounted to suicide. No one wants war, but no one wants to be a victim of Hitlers, Stalins, Saddams and sadists. To see this issue as either simple war or peace is to misunderstand the entire concept of right and wrong.

Men and women fight wars adademic fools and climate change itiots cause them.

It is futile to try to evaluate Obama's opinions because you will never know where exactly he stands on anything.He can argue eloquently on any side of any issue.

What is a Truth? can you define Truth.Is killing some one who do not agree with you but has done no harm is a Truth, or not killing some one who agree with you but has done harm to your cause, is a Truth.Or with Napolian, "I make wars to bring peace, or Obama, I believe in JUST wars to bring peace." To me, war and peace is state of mind.

What is a Truth? can you define Truth.Is killing some one who do not agree with you and has done no harm is a Truth or not killing some one who agree with you, but has done harm to your cause.Or subscribing to Napolian policies, "I make war to bring Peace." Or Obama new doctrine, "I believe in JUST WAR, to bring peace."

Did Obama really break any new ground in discussing peace? The concept of a Just War hasn't been discussed much lately. Obama recalled a term about which there hasn't been much recent discourse. But in the end, Obama has an orthodox faith in the notion of a Just War. Apostles of Peace do not. Can we get to peace via war? I don't think so. Neither did Gandhi, whose commitment to non-violence impelled Martin Luther King. President Obama would love to have 'squared the circle' once again, as he explained how his escalation of war is a path to peace. It just doesn't work: not intellectually, not physically. In this instance Obama's imagination has failed, his moral courage has failed, leadership toward change has failed. His self-confidence as a force of hope seems to have failed. War does not work. We are still glorifying wars and warriors, at a time when there is nothing glorious at all in how we wage war.

President Obama is a fool to pursue the folly of repeating the insanity of Vietnam in Afghanistan. Obviously a captive of those who profit from war, he continues to nurture further development of the plutocracy in which we all live and are forced to endure. It is wholly ironic and hypocritical for President Obama to preach about a "just war" when he has never served in the military, much less faced the horrors of war on a battle front. It also is wholly illogical and unjust for a war president not to institute a military draft so that all of America can be confronted with President Obama's folly.

I am perfectly aware governing is a real conundrum, but I have to cope with matter of facts and civilians killed randomly just bolster the concept that war can only be "unjust", as well as peace, as put in the sense of mutual and unharmful interaction, only "just".

Obama / Soetoro / Or whatever your real name is get your olive branch and march your a$$ into the Mountains of Afganistan and Pakistan and offer it to the Taliban and Al Qaeda.

peace is a absolute word. world is not absolute.therefore a peace prize has to be relative not absolute.the theory of " nonviolence" is to not to wage war unless provoked. in hindu mythology even deities have to declare war after exhausation of peace process. therefore "any war" has to be seen in the context of its " purpose".sadaam was a provocation, bush mishandled it.afpak is a challnage to civil society leave obama if any netizens have any crediable solution? any state has two solutions, either convince the challenger to mend its way or crush it.muslim clergy has failed to convince their followers to understand real meaning of " islam". "islam" as a religion is captive of "deneraged men' supported by oil and drug traders.obama is being criticized by peoples who has nothing at stake. obama in general and other reasonable heads of state of our planet must step out and exercise the 2nd option since first has been exhausted

I agree with our President very much, but i would like to add that if he is on the right track that he should also be willing to acknowledge that not all wars should be fought with guns but with the true elevation of those whom we are fighting for.
In this case we are fighting to establish a more wholesome life for true Afghans. This is why this war has reached such a stalemate. Who are these Afghans who are so desperate to take their nation from post stone age, to the 21K in a matter of weeks? certainly not Karzie who is nothing more than a plant by the previous admin. How can you even have an election in a country where we have not even done a census. How can we pay Karzie to set up a government in a nation where there was no governance before. Where is the whole concept of creeping before walking, where is the concept of a lawless people coming to grips with living in a country of laws. This war which we have been fighting is based on our own ignorance of insight and the ignorance of a people who are themselves ignorant of modernity.
The most egregious aspect of all these war was the cavalier attitude which we took to get into this war. We have no anthropology that has so far proven that we had a grip on what we were about.
So Mr. President go and fight the war but please approach it in a more capable way that sets you apart from the previous administration.
Oh by the way your military advisors and strategist lack the guile to really do what needs to be done to catch Osama Bin Laden. We have yet to find the soft underbelly of this dragon. We have yet to make international terrorists reflect on their own mortality in other words, it should not be so much about the bombers as it should be about those who stoke the spirit of this war and are far removed from the actual carnage.
Good Luck Sir

President Obama got elected because the American people were sick and tired of the Iraq war - and a president who seemed oblivious to the will of the people. Obama claims that the Iraq war is "winding down". Hogwash! In the meantime, the Obama administration is willfully escalating a war "that the American people did not seek". He can talk all day about "just peace" - but the truth is in what he does, not what he says. How is this different from Bush?

Obama raises an important point, the fact that over the past decades the world has fooled itself into believing that sanctions and arms embargos create peace. One need only look a Sudan where an arms embargo has enabled Arab militia and the Sudanese forces by providing easy targets of civilians. The right to self defense is one right that is denied to many individuals but as long as we sip a nice chardonnay and condemn war we can say we are good people. But as Obama has pointed out the world and the concept of good, bad, war and peace are more complex than most think.

As Just War Theory is not new, neither is the concept of Just Peace. Yes, we live in a complex world, also nothing new. However, to suggest that the concept of Good versus Evil is outdated or simplistic borders on the naive.

Any longitudinal glance at world news/history demonstrates the tangible reality that both good and evil exist in our world (and it would seem evil is winning). What is equally apparent is the lengths to which the perpetrators of evil justify their actions with empty rhetoric - also nothing new.

I suggest we return to and extend the grounding this nation had in the Judeo-Christian ethic, sans the many aberrations which simply justify evil through sophism; and embrace Christ's call to peace which is peace with God through His son Jesus the Christ. Simplistic? Not when one considers the complexity and subtlety of evil and its effects on each and every one of us.

President Obama is well aware that the way the U.S. drones are used,too many innocent civilians are killed. Don't pay attention to what he says but to what he orders. It's all just rhetoric. He should order to keep the collateral damage to a minimum.

Utterly dreadful hogwash. The war we have is the war we created. The Taliban, radical Pakistan via Zia, our current "men in Iran," not just war, not just peace, just recipes for the disaster we have written.