.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}


news & opinion with no titillating non-news from the major non-news channels.


I am: progressive, not a wild-eyed Progressive; liberal, but shun liberals and Liberals; conservative, but some Conservatives worry me; absolutely NOT a libertarian. I am: an idealist, but no utopian; a pragmatist, but no Machiavellian. I am a realist who dreams.


I welcome all opinions.

Thursday, April 27, 2006

Huffy Puffs:
   "Bush guilty of crimes against Christianity"

RJ Eskow has written a post for the Huffington Post detailing the 7 Points of what a Just War is, and how Bush has failed every point. He has also created his own 3 Point rules that govern ethical Christian conduct in war. Naturally, Bush fails every point in his estimation.

Here are my responses to all 10 Points. I give Bush 9 out of 10.

The war must have a just cause.

Removing the Butcher from Baghdad from power and serving midwife to a new democracy is a just cause

It must be waged by a legitimate authority.

Ignoring the moral right to use might for right, if the UN is the only legitimate authority as RJ claims (it is not), then Bush got it.

It must be formally declared.

Which word in Bush's statement, comply with UN resolutions or else, and the Congressional bill authorizing Bush to take action, does RJ not understand?

It must be fought with a peaceful intention

Presuming that RJ is implying that the peaceful intent be one of results, why is freedom and liberty for Iraqis not a peaceful intent? RJ claims Regime change is not a peaceful intention. Yes it is, when that regime has no legitimacy beyond brute force.

It must be a last resort.

Define last resort. I define it in this context as 12 years of non-compliance with UN demands. Has not RJ given the UN that legitimacy?

There must be reasonable hope of success.

Which Iraqi election did RJ miss?

The means used must be proportional to the ends sought.

Since RJ denies that kicking Saddam out of office (ie regime change) is not a legitimate means to the end (freedom), then I guess he and I will just have to agree to disagree.

RJ's rules that govern ethical Christian conduct once war has begun:

Noncombatants must be given immunity.

RJ argues that the following violated this principle: 1) Any strike on Iran that caused civilian death would be equally un-Christian. and 2) mass detentions of innocent civilians in torture centers.

1) RJ has just proven that no war in history has ever been ethical.
2) RJ's "innocent civilians" were captured on the battlefield.

Prisoners must be treated humanely.

"Waterboarding" is hardly torture. But, I am willing to give RJ a pass on this, for the sake of the argument.

International treaties and conventions must be honored.

I don't recall Christ decreeing that it was unethical to disobey Roman law.


Post a Comment

<< Home