0
   

What I've heard about Iraq

 
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Feb, 2005 01:30 am
bayinghound wrote:
Brandon9000 wrote:
When I said that war has usually been considered inherently extra-legal, I was responding to [the assertion that the war on Iraq was illegal], and I meant that throughout history, countries which have conducted wars have rarely attempted to satisfy any international laws or treaties which regulate when they may or may not go to war, even as we did not seek any such foreign permission slip to declare WW 2."


To begin with, whether or not we did not seek foreign permission to declare war in WW2, whether countries have generally sought to satisfy international covenants when declaring war, and whether or not the declaration of war is subject to provisions of international law, and thus "extra-legal", are discrete points, which you have muddled.

They are not discrete points. Countries have generally not sought permission to declare war, we did not seek any such permission in WW2 or most of the wars we have fought, and there have historically generally not been international laws attempting to govern declarations of war because it has generally been recognized that a country will jolly well declare war when it pleases regardless of whether some external entity says they cannot. That is a perfectly reasonable usage of the term extra-legal applied to international law. Furthermore, I note in passing that, contrary to what you say above, a situation in which the declaration of war were subject to provisions of international law would not cause such declaration to be extra-legal.

bayinghound wrote:
In WW2 our declaration of war was firmly within the boundaries of the established conventions of international law. International law (which is not a single straightforward entity, by the way) did not have a provision saying that any country must seek the approval of an international tribunal prior to declaring war. In respect to international law, therefore, our declaration was not "extra-legal".

WW2 is simply one of many examples of wars which were initiated without foreign permission. The fact that there was not an international body demanding such permission or adherence to some treaty is irrelevant. Countries have typically declared wars without reference to international law.

bayinghound wrote:
Indeed, a declaration of war itself, as opposed to say, a sneak attack on Pearl Harbor, is an act to satisfy international conventions of war.

It seems to me that when a country declares war, this does not imply that it subordinates its right to declare war to any foreign power or body of law or is thereby promising to abide by any legal requirement governing initiation of wars.


bayinghound wrote:
Further, throughout 99.9% of history international law did not have a provision saying that any country must seek the approval of an international tribunal prior to declaring war. Therefore, with respect to international law "throughout 99.9% of human history" the declaration of war has not "been recognized as inherently extralegal."

International law had no such provision because it was generally accepted that a country would declare war when in pleased and would not be bound in any such way to international regulation. This was a recognition that initiation war was an activity outside of legal restriction.


bayinghound wrote:
Further, throughout a great portion of history, nations have sought the permission of an international tribunal to wage war, namely the Apostolic See.

This would be a counter example - a situation in which initiation of war was subject to some degree of foreign approval.

However, not to lose sight of the main point, when I made the initial statement, I was reacting to another poster's statement that the invasion of Iraq was illegal by pointing out that countries have usually not historically regarded their decision to go to war as subject to legal restriction by foreign entities.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Feb, 2005 12:10 pm
So what?

We are active participants and supporters of the UN. We're not supposed to be doing what we're doing, whether or not anyone can stop us from doing it; it's the whole point of the security council. We would condemn another country for doing what we are doing.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Feb, 2005 11:35 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
So what?

We are active participants and supporters of the UN. We're not supposed to be doing what we're doing, whether or not anyone can stop us from doing it; it's the whole point of the security council. We would condemn another country for doing what we are doing.

Cycloptichorn

My point is that you and others act as though it is the quintessence of evil to fail to abide by a convention which has been in existence for only the blink of an eye, historically speaking. By reserving the right to decide ourselves when we do or do not go to war, we are only behaving in a way which countries have almost always behaved throughout history, hardly an act of unparallelled evil.
0 Replies
 
bayinghound
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Feb, 2005 07:11 pm
declaration of war not historically "extra-legal"
Throughout history, a "declaration of war" itself has been considered an act of abiding by international conventions of war, & hence, not "extra-legal":

Reader's Companion to Military History wrote:


A Houghton-Mifflin Textbook

An example of a Bull issued by the Pope empowering a sovereign nation -- though that meant something hugely different from what we mean by sovereign nation today -- to go to war with another, well, set of tribes:

The Bull of Pope Adrian IV Empowering Henry II to Conquer Ireland. A.D. 1155 wrote:
Bishop Adrian, servant of the servants of God, sends to his dearest son in Christ, the illustrious king of the English, greeting and apostolic benediction. Laudably and profitably enough thy magnificence thinks of extending thy glorious name on earth, and of heaping up rewards of eternal felicity in Heaven, inasmuch as, like a good catholic prince, thou dost endeavour to enlarge the bounds of the church, to declare the truth of the Christian faith to ignorant and barbarous nations, and to extirpate the plants of evil from the field of the Lord. And, in order the better to perform this, thou dost ask the advice and favour of the apostolic see. In which work, the more lofty the counsel and the better the guidance by which thou dost proceed, so much more do we trust that, by God's help, thou wilt progress favourably in the same; for the reason that those things which have taken their rise from ardour of faith and love of religion are accustomed always to come to a good end and termination.

There is indeed no doubt, as thy Highness doth also acknowledge, that Ireland and all other islands which Christ the Sun of Righteousness has illumined, and which have received the doctrines of the Christian faith, belong to the jurisdiction of St. Peter and of the holy Roman Church. Wherefore, so much the more willingly do we grant to them that the right faith and the seed grateful to God may be planted in them, the more we perceive, by examining more strictly our conscience, that this will be required of us.

Thou hast signified to us, indeed, most beloved son in Christ, that thou dost desire to enter into the island of Ireland, in order to subject the people to the laws and to extirpate the vices that have there taken root, and that thou art willing to pay an annual pension to St. Peter of one penny from every house, and to preserve the rights of the churches in that land inviolate and entire. We, therefore, seconding with the favour it deserves thy pious and laudable desire, and granting a benignant assent to thy petition, are well pleased that, for the enlargement of the bounds of the church. for the restraint of vice, for the correction of morals and the introduction of virtues, for the advancement of the Christian religion, thou shouldst enter that island, and carry out there the things that look to the honour of God and to its own salvation. And may the people of that land receive thee with honour, and venerate thee as their master; provided always that the rights of the churches remain inviolate and entire, and saving to St. Peter and the holy Roman Church the annual pension of one penny from each house. If, therefore, thou dost see fit to complete what thou hast conceived in thy mind, strive to imbue that people with good morals, and bring it to pass, as well through thyself as through those whom thou dost know from their faith, doctrine, and course of life to be fit for such a work, that the church may there be adorned, the Christian religion planted and made to grow, and the things which pertain to the honour of God and to salvation be so ordered that thou may'st merit to obtain an abundant and lasting reward from God, and on earth a name glorious throughout the ages.


It is not an historical anomoly for a state to ask the permission of an international or foreign body for permission to declare war. An example of another international body ... the Holy Roman Empire ... seeking to put bounds on the wars being fought by various entities that were in that supra-national body:

Decree of the Emperor Henry IV Concerning a Truce of God; 1085 A.D. wrote:
Whereas in our times the holy church has been afflicted beyond measure by tribulations through having to join in suffering so many oppressions and dangers, we have so striven to aid it, with God's help, that the peace which we could not make lasting by reason of our sins, we should to some extent make binding by at least exempting certain days. In the year of the Lord's incarnation, 1085, in the 8th indiction, it was decreed by God's mediation, the clergy and people unanimously agreeing: that from the first day of the Advent of our Lord until the end of the day of the Epiphany, and from the beginning of Septuagesima until the 8th day after Pentecost, and throughout that whole day, and on every Thursday, Friday, Saturday, and Sunday, until sunrise on Monday, and on the day of the fast of the four seasons, and on the eve and the day itself of each of the apostles-moreover on every day canonically set apart, or in future to be set apart for fasting or for celebrating,-this decree of peace shall be observed. The purpose of it is that those who travel and those who remain at home may enjoy the greatest possible security, so that no one shall commit murder or arson, robbery or assault, no man shall injure another with a whip or a sword or any kind of weapon, and that no one, no matter on account of what wrong he shall be at feud, shall, from the Advent of our Lord to the 8th day after Epiphany, and from Septuagesima until the 8th day after Pentecost, presume to bear as weapons a shield, sword, or lance-or, in fact, the burden of any armour. Likewise on the other days-namely, on Sundays, Thursdays, Fridays, Saturdays, and on the eve and day of each of the apostles, and on every day canonically fixed, or to be fixed, for fasting or celebrating,-it is unlawful, except for those going a long distance, to carry arms; and even then under the condition that they injure no one in any way. It, during the space for which the peace has been declared, it shall be necessary for any one to go to another place where that peace isn't observed, he may bear arms; provided, nevertheless, that he harm no one unless he is at. tacked and has to defend himself. Moreover, when he returns, he shall lay aside his weapons again. If it shall happen that a castle is being besieged, the besiegers shall cease from the attack during the days included in the peace, unless they are attacked by the besieged, and are obliged to beat them back.

And lest this statute of peace be violated with impunity by any person, the following sentence was decreed by all present: If a freeman or a noble shall have violated it- that is, if he shall have committed murder, or shall have transgressed it in any other way,-he shall, without any payments or any friends being allowed to intervene, be expelled from within his boundaries, and his heirs may take his whole estate; and if he hold a fief, the lord to whom it belongs shall take it. But if, after his expulsion, his heirs shall be found to have given him any aid or support, and shall be convicted of it, the estate shall be taken from them and shall fall to the portion of the king. But if he wish to clear himself of the charges against him, he shall swear with 12 who are equally noble and free. If a slave kill a man he shall be beheaded; if he wound him he shall have his right hand cut off; if he have transgressed in any other way-by striking with his fist, or a stone, or a whip, or any thing else-he shall be flogged and shorn. But if the accused (slave) wish to prove his innocence, he shall purge himself by the ordeal of cold water: in such wise, however, that he himself, and no one in his place, be sent to the water. But if, fearing the sentence that has been passed against him, he shall have fled,-he shall be forever under the bane. And wherever he is heard to be, letters shall be sent there announcing that he is under the bane, and that no one may hold intercourse with him. The hands may not be cut off of boys who have not yet completed their 12th year; if boys, then, shall transgress this peace, they shall be punished with whipping only. It is not an infringement of the peace if any one order a delinquent, slave, or a scholar, or any one who is subject to him in any way, to be beaten with rods or with whips. It is an exception also to this statute of peace, if the emperor shall publicly order an expedition to be made to seek the enemies of the realm, or shall be pleased to hold a council to judge the enemies of justice. The peace is not violated if, while it continues, the duke, or other counts or bailiffs, or their substitutes hold courts, and lawfully exercise judgment over thieves and robbers, and other harmful persons. This imperial peace has been decreed chiefly for the security of all those who are at feud; but not to the end that, after the peace is over, they may dare to rob and plunder throughout the villages and homes. For the law and judgment that was in force against them before this peace was decreed shall be most diligently observed, so that they be restrained from iniquity;-for robbers and plunderers are excepted from this divine peace, and, in fact, from every peace. If any one strive to oppose this pious decree, so that he will neither promise the peace to God nor observe it, no priest shall presume to sing a mass for him or to give heed to his salvation; if he be ill, no Christian shall presume to visit him, and, unless he come to his senses, he shall do without the Eucharist even at the end. If any one, either at the present time or among our posterity forever, shall presume to violate it, he is banned by us irrevocably. We decree that it rests not more in the power of the counts or centenars, or any official, than in that of the whole people in common, to inflict the above mentioned punishments on the violators of the holy peace. And let them most diligently be on their guard lest, in punishing, they show friendship or hatred, or do anything contrary to justice; let them not conceal the crimes of any one, but rather make them public. No one shall accept money for the redemption of those who shall have been found transgressing. Merchants on the road where they do business, rustics while labouring at rustic work-at ploughing, digging, reaping, and other similar occupations,-shall have peace every day. Women, moreover, and all those ordained to sacred orders, shall enjoy continual peace. In the churches, moreover, and in the cemeteries of the churches, let honour and reverence be paid to God; so that if a robber or thief flee thither he shall not at all be sieved, but shall be besieged there until, induced by hunger, he shall be compelled to surrender. If any one shall presume to furnish the culprit with means of defence, arms, victuals, or opportunity for flight, he shall be punished with the same penalty as the guilty man. We forbid under our bane, moreover, that any one in sacred orders, convicted of transgressing this peace, be punished with the punishments of laymen-he shall, instead, be handed over to the bishop. Where laymen are decapitated, clerks shall be degraded; where laymen are mutilated, clerks shall be suspended from their positions; and, by the consent of the laity, they shall be afflicted with frequent fasts and flagellations until they shall have atoned. Amen.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/14/2024 at 05:15:41