“Perhaps the time has come for a similarly radical witness on warfare. Even though there remain compelling reasons to fight wars, just as there can be compelling reasons for abortion, the reasons in both cases simply cannot override the exceptionless prohibition against the deliberate killing of the innocent. Even just wars butcher shocking numbers of innocent soldiers caught up in them. Some readers of America probably considered one or both U.S. wars against Iraq justified, but no one can deny that both wars included the deliberate killing of conscripted Iraqi boys, themselves victims of the regime, who were sitting in their barracks or trenches and who never saw the bombs coming. They, like the 16-year-old Joseph Ratzinger asleep in his bunk, did not deserve to be killed any more than unborn children in the womb. The circumstances that make war or abortion seem necessary, no matter how grave, still do not change the wrongness of the killing. While this analysis may commit Catholic ethics to a position on war that most people might consider extreme and dangerous, moral consistency may well require it.” – David Carroll Cochran, America, The National Catholic Review
Mandeville, LA – Let’s see if we have this correct. Obama can CONTRAVENE international law, The UN charter to which we are signatories, and conduct war in Syria? The Second Article of The U.N. Charter reads thus:
All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.
All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations. [emphasis mine, MC]
Peering a little further behind the international law-curtain on the matter of non-intervention, Princeton Economics Professor Michael Wood has concluded that. “There is no doubt that the principle of non-intervention remains a well-established part of international law. The prohibition of intervention “is a corollary of every state’s right to sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence.” [emphasis mine, MC]
THIS is what Congress “authorized”:
In order to protect the United States and other countries from terrorist attacks by the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), and in order to protect individuals from acts of violence in clear contravention of international law and basic human rights, the President is authorized, as part of a multinational coalition, subject to the limitations in subsection (b)—
(1)to use all necessary and appropriate force to participate in a campaign of airstrikes in Iraq, and if the President deems necessary, in Syria, to degrade and defeat ISIL; and
(2)to provide military equipment and training to forces fighting ISIL in Iraq or Syria, including the Iraqi security forces, Kurdish fighters, and other legitimate, appropriately vetted, non-terrorist opposition groups in Syria.
Next the Congress admonishes Obama to NOT use force with the caveat being, force is defined as “boots on the ground”.
The authorization in this section does not include—
(1) authorization for the use of United States ground combat forces, except for the purposes set forth in subsection..(2)authorization for the use of force against forces associated with ISIL, unless such forces are identified in a report submitted under section 4.
Congress is, in other words, playing games with words so their lust for war games (and the spoils therein) can commence without them actually haveing to debate a Just War, then declare it. But wait a minute, are lobbing 50, $17 million each, “Cruise missiles” from aircraft carriers into Syria and act of war or just a show of “military force”? The authoritative Emmerich Vattel, defined “War” in his “Law of Nations” book.
“WAR is that state in which we prosecute our right by force. We also understand, by this term, the act itself, or the manner of prosecuting our right by force: but it is more conformable to general usage, and more proper in a treatise on the law of war, to understand this term in the sense we have annexed to it.” [emphasis mine – MC]
Perhaps we can gain some insight into this current round of constitutional atrocities committed by Boehner, Reid and Obama by checking out the text of the U.S.’s last Declaration of War, made against Japan in 1941.
JOINT RESOLUTION Declaring that a state of war exists between the Imperial Government of Japan and the Government and the people of the United States and making provisions to prosecute the same.
Whereas the Imperial Government of Japan has committed unprovoked acts of war against the Government and the people of the United States of America:
Therefore be it Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the state of war between the United States and the Imperial Government of Japan which has thus been thrust upon the United States is hereby formally declared; and the President is hereby authorized and directed to employ the entire naval and military forces of the United States and the resources of the Government to carry on war against the Imperial Government of Japan; and, to bring the conflict to a successful termination, all the resources of the country are hereby pledged by the Congress of the United States. [emphasis mine]
I searched the JR “authorizing” Obama’s dubious actions in Syria for the term “war” and got 4 hits, each one directly related to quoting from the “War Powers Act”. There is not one mention of ISIS/ISIL committing “acts of war” against the government and people of The United States, yet the United States has responded by, pace Vattel, making war INSIDE the sovereign country of Syria, without it’s permission, without declaring it and in violation of international law it delights in accusing the rest of the civilized world, including the Russians, for violating.
We are governed and led by demagogues and anti-intellects that are as “extreme” as the “extremists” we purport to rid the world of but instead continue to preside over the multiplication of the disease. What is even more sad is to witness the Jacobin like support these actions receive from a “Christian” population that is as Christian as the “priest” and “disciples” who attended Sunday’s “black-mass” in OK City. There is no thought to the question of whether ANY of our actions meet Just War Theory thresholds. No exaltation of the usually venerated Constitution which is clearly being ignored here and hardly a peep from the heretics masquerading as “pastors”, cautioning their flocks to despise the violence, destruction and death that War brings and to solemnly pray for it being forestalled until necessity demands it. No, instead flocks of sheople will be instructed to “pray for our troops” instead of praying for humility and peace.