03/08/2005
Iraq War - Just War?
Many people know that Pope John Paul II declared the Iraq War an unjust war before he died. Many Anti-War activists have argued that the Iraq War was not a “Just War,” since it was proposed at the end of 2002.But most people don’t even know what a “Just War” is and how the Iraq War matches up to the ideas behind “Just War Theory.”
So, in my search for truth I have found the definition of a "Just War" and I have tried to show how it pertains to the Iraq War.
There are five requirements for a War to be determined to be “Just.” First, it needs to have a “Just Cause.” Second, it must be declared with the “Proper Authority.” Third, it needs to be waged with the “Proper Intention.” Fourth, it needs to have a “High Probability of Success.” And finally its benefits need to outweigh the effects of the war.
So, lets compare these ideas with the current War, the War in Iraq.
First, was there as “Just Cause” for the Iraq War? Well, it depends on the stories that you hear and who you hear the stories from. The administration contended that Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction. This alone doesn’t give the USA Just Cause for invading Iraq. Many countries around the world possess Weapons of Mass Destruction. The administration also said that Iraq had ties to Terrorists. Again, this is bad, but a “Just Cause” has traditionally meant “Self Defense.” Traditionally a country has “Just Cause” to attack a country if they are already being attacked by the same country. The Bush administration has changed the idea of “Just Cause” to mean that a pre-emptive strike on an emanate threat is also a “Just Cause.” This is not a widely held belief among experts on “Just War Theory.” So, the equation comes to: If Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction and If Iraq had ties to Terrorists and If the USA knew that the Iraqis were going to sell or give these weapons to the Terrorists, then Iraq posed an “emanate threat” and loosely this “emanate threat” could be used to provide “Just Cause” for a Just War. In post analysis, we now know that there were no Weapons of Mass Destruction. And, We know that there were no ties between the terrorists and the Iraq government. Hence, there was no “Just Cause” for the war in Iraq. However, the Bush administration asserted that Saddam Hussein was a “Bad Man” therefore there was a “Just Cause” for the war. However, this argument fails if you consider that any Terrorist Group can claim that George W Bush is a “Bad Man” and therefore have “Just Cause” to attack the USA.
Second, the Iraq War needs to be declared with the “Proper Authority.” Proper Authority means that the government declares a War that is in accordance to the will of the people. The Iraq War was declared with about 80% of the people agreeing with the action, so it could be claimed that the will of the people was being done, and therefore the government elected by the people was doing the will of the people. However, we currently understand that lies and deception were used to sway the perception of the need to go to war. The question becomes, if the truth was known would the people opt to support the Iraq War invasion? The Bush administration must therefore deny any knowledge of lies or deception and the argument becomes impossible to argue, because only the administration knows the truth, unless Judith Miller comes clean.
Third, Proper Intention is ties closely into the previous point. The administration could market the idea of going to War in Iraq in order to defend America from Terrorists, but the true intentions could be to take revenge on Saddam Hussein, seize the Iraq Oil fields, change the government to be friendlier to US interest in the region. All of these intentions are not the same as the declared intention at the beginning of the War. They are all different than the “Just Cause” hence they are not “Proper Intentions.”
Fourth, the administration wasn’t concerned with the probability of success in Iraq at all. This is because the Bush administration only cared about a quick military victory and they had no concern with the aftermath of the War. Many military leaders commented on the lack of planning for after the War. The end game is the measure of success and if the administration took the time to plan, there could have been a probability of success. However, without planning the definition of success needs to be changed in order to meet it.
Finally Fifth, the benefits need to outweigh the cost in both blood and money. The jury is still out on this as the number of Americans and Iraqis killed continues to climb and the benefit of an Iraq under some other regime still hasn’t happened yet.
Since we can not know the result of the fifth necessary point we can only look at the first four to determine whether the US has conducted a Just War in Iraq based on Just War Theory. Remember that if the administration fails any one of these points it fails the criteria. The administration pays lip service to every point in some way, but I would say that an honest non-biased person looking at this list would need to claim that the USA has failed on at least one of these points. Now that we know that Karl Rove, Bush’s Right hand man was spreading misinformation in order to discredit Joe Wilson we must believe that this was not the only case of deception. So, point number three was most likely intentionally violated. And, if this point was intentionally violated then points one and two were verbally complied with, but they were intentionally violated behind closed doors of the administration. As to point four, the best defense of the administration is to plead ignorance. Surely a thinking American that cares about our country does not want to really on an ignorant administration. But, then again we have been saying this for four years now.
politics and Iraq
15:22 Posted in Culture, Politics, Religion, Travel | Permalink | Comments (15) | Email this | Tags: Politics
Comments
" Pope John Paul II declared the Iraq War an unjust war before he died"
Reference?
Somehow, I expect you'll either refuse to cite on, or give a reference to something else...
-Dan
Posted by: Dan tdaxp | 04/08/2005
From here as one source, but there are many. You really should learn to use Goggle.
http://www.catholicpeacefellowship.org/nextpage.asp?m=2199
"Just before the war, the pope sent an envoy, Cardinal Pio Laghi, to ask Bush to exhaust every last means of diplomacy and work through the United Nations for a peaceful solution. The Vatican called the war illegal and unjust. But before the cardinal even touched down in Washington, the administration said the meeting would not matter. The White House countered the pope's claim that an invasion was unjust with apocalyptic visions of needing to stop a Hitler."
Posted by: Dr. Forbush | 04/08/2005
So to back-up your unsourced allegation you give... another unsourced allegation?
Where did the Vatican Say this? Was it by the Papal Nuncio? By a formal letter? Through the Vatican Secretary of State?
Please, provide a reference, or do not make such claims about my faith.
Posted by: Dan tdaxp | 04/08/2005
I'm sure you don't believe in the Hollacaust either, deal with it!
Posted by: Dr. Forbush | 04/08/2005
Dan,
Try this one, or is it heresay:
http://www.cjd.org/paper/jp2war.html
It goes into quite a bit of detail pointing out which principles of just war theory that Bush violated...
Posted by: Dr. Forbush | 04/08/2005
Forbush,
An interesting editorial you linked to. The most direct claim appears to be
'' Archbishop Renato Martino, who used the same words in calling the possible military intervention a "crime against peace that cries out vengeance before God," also criticized the pressure that the most powerful nations exerted on the less powerful ones on the U.N. Security Council to support the war. ''
While the article doesn't give the full quote, so it is impossible to know whether or not he was talking about the Iraq War or speaking more generally and the author merely distorted his words, I can say this:
Archibishop Renato Martino is not unimportant -- he is won of just dozens of leaders in the Roman Curia (http://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/country/dva.html). The equivilent of a Deputy Undersecretary in the Federal bureaucracy. The other statements appear to be categorical, and true regardless of the justification of any specific war, or the personal opinion of the editorial writer.
So a leader in the Roman Curia -- the equivalent of a Deputy Under-Secretary -- is the best you can come up with to justify "Pope John Paul II declared the Iraq War an unjust war before he died." What a terrible way to use the memory of a beloved man!
Or is this like your "academic" work -- a case where you decline to give citations?
Posted by: Dan tdaxp | 04/08/2005
You misspelled my name, but no worries.
I asked for a reference, and you provide opinion articles. You imply very serious things about the former wordly head of my Church, and somehow you answer that by claiming I "didn't go on" to pursue a PhD?
So if the Pope said that, where did he say that? Or are opinion articles the only thing you can find?
Posted by: Dan tdaxp | 04/08/2005
The Pope to his credit said that the Iraq War was Unjust. It may have been through his office and it may have been heresay from a sermon he gave, but the media at the time clearly said that he believed that a pre-emptive strike against Iraq was unjust.
Whether you choose to deny this is your own problem. The articles that I put forward were not opinion articles as you claim any more than similar articles have been published saying that homosexual marriage is a sin. The articles I put forward gave the details about what points the Vatican had problems with in the Iraq conflict. If a reporter telling us what the church thinks is an opinion piece then we are all in trouble.
Posted by: Dr. Forbush | 05/08/2005
"The Pope to his credit said that the Iraq War was Unjust. It may have been through his office and it may have been heresay from a sermon he gave, but the media at the time clearly said that he believed that a pre-emptive strike against Iraq was unjust."
Ah, a second-hand account of an unsourced story from the "media"!
Remember how after I asked for a reference, I guessed you wouldn't provide one?
I guess I was right! :)
Posted by: Dan tdaxp | 05/08/2005
So what are you so poorly trying to say on this issue?
1) Are you saying that the Pope didn't say this, but someone else did, so it doesn't count?
2) Or, are you saying that the Vatican coerced the Pope to say this? But there isn't any documentation, so it didn't count.
3) Or, are you saying that you are in denial on the role of the Pope here and you wouldn't believe this unless you had a signed document?
4) Or, are you saying that the Iraq War was Just and the Pope couldn't have been against it. Since we don't have a signed document we just don't know and we can't know.
5) Or do you have some other goofy reason for not accepting this point? Please Explain.
Posted by: Dr. Forbush | 05/08/2005
Well, mostly simply I am saying that you were wrong when you said
"Many people know that Pope John Paul II declared the Iraq War an unjust war before he died."
You made a statement of fact. It was incorrect.
You are putting words in the head of the former eartly head of the Universal Church. Please stop. It is odious, uninformed, and (because claims here are being made up instead of being based on evidence) unscientific.
I tried to read your numbered list, but its incoherence jumped out immediately
"Are you saying that the Pope didn't say this, but someone else did, so it doesn't count?"
Doesn't count how? For what? What are you talking about?!? ??
The quality of the numbered options - or whatever those were supposed to be -- degraded from there.
So I'll say again: You made a statement of fact. You have yet to support it. Either cite proof or withdraw your statement.
Anything less would be just... unscientific.
Posted by: Dan tdaxp | 05/08/2005
OK, he certainly said this:
"War cannot be decided upon, even when it is a matter of ensuring the common good, except as the very last option and in accordance with very strict conditions."
This is a quote sited in many places.
This agrees with the Just War theory described above.
And, the Iraq War was not the last resort simply based on the case that we could still have soldiers in Kuwait waiting for Iraq to let inspectors do their jobs.
So, by logic clearly understood by the Vatican the Pope by this statement declaired the Iraq War Unjust.
Posted by: Dr. Forbush | 05/08/2005
Here is a link to the source for the above quote:
http://www.americancatholic.org/News/JustWar/Iraq/papalstatement.asp
Posted by: Dr. Forbush | 05/08/2005
Yes, I agree that the Pope said those war about war. And they are true.
I also agree that the Catholic Church agrees with Just War Theory. It only makes sense, as it invented Just War Theory.
However, the statement " the Iraq War was not the last resort" is your opinion, not the Pope's.
If you can cite differently, please do so. It'd be the scientific thing to do.
Posted by: Dan tdaxp | 05/08/2005
That is just stupid!
Obviously it was not the last resort, and I challenge you to cite one source saying that it was a last resort. The UN couldn't vote that it was a last resort. And, no action at all would result in no harm to the USA.
The Vatican continues to support this view in all reference to the Iraq War.
Open your eyes, it would be the human thing to do.
Posted by: Dr. Forbush | 06/08/2005
The comments are closed.