Daily Kos :: The GOP Bloodbath: Even the army is debating the war.

Too little, too late....

The war in Iraq is so bad that even the Army is allowing debate on whether the war was justified or not. Franklin Eric Wester, an Army colonel and chaplin, has written an article for the Army War College's journal examining the war from the basis of the Christian Just War Theory and concluding that it doesn't meet the test.

The St. Louis Post Dispatch quotes Wester as saying that his fellow officers have not changed the way they've treated him since the article was published. This is anecdotal, but this suggests that Wester's article may reflect a lot of people's private doubts about the justification of the war.

While I cannot agree with everything in the article, I feel it is significant that even the Army brass is starting to question the war's justification. The Army is all about moving in lockstep with the President and the Armed Forces are normally among Bush's biggest supporters.


Diaries :: Eternal Hope's diary ::

Here is how Wester evaluates the war in the light of the Just War Theory:

Legitimate Authority: Wester says this criteria is not justified because the US barely had an ad hoc "coalition of the willing." He writes that Bush's use of the phrase is vague. The fact is, every country except for Britian contributed only a tolken force. And even Britian has withdrawn most of their troops from Iraq.

Public Declaration: Wester says this criteria was met by the President's ultimatum right before the war started. However, I disagree with this. The Constitution only gives Congress the right to declare war against another country. The Iraq War Resolution did not a declaration of war; it only authorized the President to use force as a last resort. Bush broke that part of the deal and therefore, he has become widely mistrusted both here and around the world.

Just Intent: Wester makes one of his best points when he quotes a Catholic theologian. He writes:

To Paul J. Griffiths, Professor of Catholic Studies at the University of Illinois, the definition of imminent has not changed: "It means the gun is at your head." And in the case of Iraq, "We just don't have that." He states that redefining imminent offers "well-intentioned support for US foreign policy, but it's not defensible in terms of traditional Just War theory."


Daily Kos :: The GOP Bloodbath: Even the army is debating the war.