Category: Controversies

How can something be “illegal” if it isn’t against the law?

Once again, the question of the “legality” of the Iraq War has reared itself on Catholic Light. I am so tired of debating this subject that it actually makes me a bit queasy to type this, but here goes.
As you probably know, there is a war going on in Iraq. But it isn’t the same war as the 2003 war to remove Saddam Hussein and dismantle his regime. If you want to argue about U.N. resolutions and “BUSH LIED!!!!!!!” and all that stuff, go ahead. But that’s history. That war is over. Saddam is on trial for his life, and nobody, not even the most committed Bush-hater, is arguing that his regime should be restored.
The war today is being played for a much different set of objectives.
It might be useful to think of this second war as a sports contest, so here is a list of the players, the objectives of the game, and the rules of play:
STARTING LINEUP
Side #1:
1. The democratically elected Iraqi government
2. The overwhelming majority of Kurds
3. The overwhelming majority of Shiites
4. Some Sunnis
5. The allied military coalition led by the U.S.
Side #2:
1. The majority of Sunnis (though this is shifting)
2. al Qaeda terrorists
3. Native Sunni terrorists
OBJECTIVES OF THE GAME
Side #1:
1. Deter or destroy international terrorist groups.
2. Deter or destroy illegal combatants (a.k.a. “insurgents”).
3. Protect ordinary Iraqis from being murdered.
4. Support and sustain the Iraqi state so it can keep public order.
Side #2:
1. Create a Taliban-style theocratic state.
2. Kill as many Kurds and Shiites as possible, including women and children.
3. Humiliate the United States by forcing it to leave Iraq.
RULES FOR EACH SIDE
Side #1:
1. Follow the laws of war.
2. Avoid civilian casualties.
3. Spare mosques, schools, hospitals, and other civilian infrastructure unless they are receiving fire from those buildings.
4. Prosecute anyone on side #1 who does not follow the laws of war.
Side #2:
1. Ignore the laws of war.
2. Use your opponent’s observance of the laws of war against him.
3. Murder civilians, including (and, often, especially) women and children.
4. Bomb mosques, schools, and hospitals.
5. Store ammunition in mosques, schools, and hospitals.
6. Shoot from mosques, schools, and hospitals.
7. Use your allies in the U.S. Democratic Party and the Western media to assist you with objective #3.
If you want to argue that the present war in Iraq is “illegal,” go ahead. But you will have an extremely difficult time doing so, since secular law isn’t with you. There is a sovereign government in Iraq, which was democratically elected by the Iraqi people. This government is recognized by the United Nations, and by its member states, as the competent authority in that country.
As a sovereign nation, Iraq has the right to determine whether foreign armies may station troops within its borders. Its government not only permits allied troops to remain, it actively encourages those troops to carry out anti-terrorist campaigns, either alone or in coordination with Iraqi security forces.
Therefore, if you want to say that the present war is “illegal,” you have to say that the Iraqi government is acting illegally by rooting out murderous thugs and letting its allies assist. Does anyone seriously want to argue that point — that Iraq has no right to seek outside assistance when it cannot secure the peace within its borders? And that the U.S. and other nations are acting illegally in coming to the defense of this legitimate, sovereign government?
Because they don’t want to look at the present moral questions of the present war, anti-war activists want to elide the difference between the two wars (or, if you like, the two distinct phases of the same war). They apparently think that since the war did not meet their standards at its commencement, the United States cannot do anything of any value in Iraq, ever. It wouldn’t matter if the “insurgents” put nuclear warheads on ICBMs and prepared to incinerate the Eastern seaboard of the United States. All the moonbats would still screech “Where are the WMDs?” and demand an immediate pullout.
A challenge for you anti-war folks: come up with an international law that says the U.S. and other nations can’t fight on the Iraqi government’s behalf.
Bonus question: Find a church document that prohibits a nation from intervening militarily on the behalf of another nation, when the object is to restore justice and protect human lives.

Refusing to serve your country = patriotism?

In the mental Wonderland of the Left, refusing to serve your country is “patriotism.” Their latest “patriot” hero is Lieutenant Ehren Watada, who received his commission after the Iraq War commenced, and is now refusing to deploy to Iraq with his unit.
Lieutenant Watada is not a hero, although he is not a coward (he will be punished under military law, unlike those who fled the country to avoid their sworn service to this country.) He abandoned the troops he was supposed to lead, and betrayed the country he pledged to defend.
He also needs to brush up on the law: being ordered to Iraq with his unit is lawful order by a legitimate authority, and he disobeyed it. If he was ordered to deliberately kill noncombatants, that’s an illegal order, and he would have a moral duty to disobey it. His self-righteous moonbat nonsense about “the deception used to wage this war, and the lawlessness that has pervaded every aspect of our civilian leadership” is beside the point. Going to war is a decision for elected officials, and an officer who receives his commission from the President of the United States does not have the authority to override it.

Where is the document?

On June 6, the Pontifical Council for the Family published a new document on Family and Human Procreation, but so far, a week later, the document is only offered on paper in Italian:

Famiglia e procreazione umana
Autori: Pontificio Consiglio per la Famiglia
Libreria Editrice Vaticana
Data di pubblicazione: 8 giugno 2006
Formato: Paperback
Codice ISBN: 8820978342
EUR 2.5

No translations? No web release? Why the delay? Don’t they know the press and the propagandists have been out there distorting this thing from the word Go?
(sigh)
I need to take a breath here. Back in the ’80s, I’d be thrilled if a new document showed up in English at the Daughters of St. Paul store two months after publication. Now I’m getting cranky ’cause it’s not available for free on the ‘net within a week.
I guess the delay really doesn’t mean much, except that the folks at the Vatican didn’t consider this such an important and newsworthy document that they would go to the extra trouble of holding up the release until the major translations were all done.
Oh, well, if you want it ASAP, go ahead and get the Italian. You can even put the text on-line, and we’ll all try to work out what it means. :-)
Update: In response to my e-mail query, a member of the Pontifical Council wrote on Thursday that he has the Italian version, but has heard nothing about the publishing of translations.

A regrettable omission

I did not include Pat-Buchanan-style paleoconservatives on the list of people who are sad about Zarqawi’s death. My apologies to the nutters on the far right, especially the ones who believe that Iran is a better country than the United States. If you are taking up a collection to emigrate, please send me your PayPal account information and I will gladly donate to your cause.
Please note that I am not talking about people who merely disagree with the decision to go to war. But if you think Iran is a harmless, traditional country with great family values, and you write columns called “Is Bush a Sith Lord?“, you are a nut. If you give this blathering nonsense a platform by publishing it, you are irresponsible.