A Just War

Have you ever considered what defines a just war?"

For over a thousand years that has been a Christian definition of what constitutes a just war. This just-war developed in the fourth century. The requirements for a just war have varied to some extent but there are shared principles.

First, there has to be an initial act of aggression, in response to which a just war may be waged.

Second, diplomatic solutions must be exhausted.

Traditional just-war criteria also demand that the initiation of war be undertaken by the proper authority. Under the U. S. Constitution, the proper authority is neither the president nor the United Nations. It is Congress.

In Iraq there was no act of aggression against the United States. We are 6,000 miles from Iraq. Stories about unmanned drones coming to get us were not especially plausible.

Diplomatic solutions had not been exhausted; they had hardly been tried.

Congress unconstitutionally delegated its decision-making power over the war to the President. By accepting Congress' unconstitutional act the President himself acted unconstitutionally, i.e. illegally.

Those who advocated war with Iraq claimed Saddam had committed an act of aggression against the United States: he had shot at our airplanes. Those American planes were monitoring "no-fly zones" over Iraq. Authority for such zones was said to come from U. N. Resolution 688, which instructs nations to contribute to humanitarian relief in the Kurdish and Shiite areas. The resolution says nothing about no-fly zones, and nothing about bombing missions over Iraq.

Saddam Hussein missed every single airplane for 12 years, as tens of thousands of flights were flown indicates just how little threat Iraq was to the United States. Iraq for all practical purposes had no functioning air force, antiaircraft weapons, or navy. This was supposed to be the great threat, requiring urgent action. Such nonsense insults the intelligence of the American people and makes the rest of the world wonder about our sanity.