 |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
On A Personal
Note...
THE FLIP-SIDE During the season of Lent, we are supposed to spend time examining our conscience, in hopes that we can identify those areas in our lives that need a bit more attention, some change, and perhaps a certain amount of healing. Through this introspection we will develop an appropriate penance, based upon a complete understanding of our faults and failings. One important detail is that, in order to fully examine our lives, we need to look at things from many angles. It stems from the simple idea that true understanding can only come after we've changed our perspective and looked at all sides of an issue. With that in mind, I think it's important to spend a few minutes examining Operation Iraqi Freedom from a different point of view. In recent weeks, I've discussed some of the reasons why the Church has not stated that this is a "just war". Yet there are theologians within the Church who have argued otherwise. So what do they have to say? First, we must understand that the Catechism of the Catholic Church clearly places the primary responsibility of deciding whether or not to engage in war directly into the hands of the public authorities acting in their official capacity. It does not say that a war can only be legitimately engaged if and when the Church proclaims it to be "just." The CCC recognizes that the public authorities are in the best position to decide, being privy to all of the facts and possibly highly confidential information. Second, Operation Iraqi Freedom is the conclusion of the just war that began in February of 1991. The conclusion of that war was interrupted in order to negotiate the terms of surrender. These terms included disarmament of the Hussein Regime, and PROOF that such disarmament had occurred. Neither of these terms was met. Thus, this is not a "preventative" war, but rather a natural extension and conclusion of the first Gulf War. Now add to the equation the concept of "asymmetrical warfare" -- where the enemy is not subject to the direction of any public authority -- and the Catholic just war doctrine may need to be adjusted a bit. September 11, 2001 was clearly an act of war, and the world community all agreed. Yet none of the just-war criteria were literally present. There were no conventional military movements, no visible signs of imminent attack, and no specific hostile nation. But it was war, nonetheless. Critics are quick to point out that the war in Afghanistan is a direct result of 9/11, but that they do not see a connection between the terrorist attacks and Saddam Hussein. But what it boils down to is an assessment of risk: the risk of doing something, versus the risk of doing nothing. Saddam Hussein has shown that he is willing to use nasty tactics to support his regime -- even on his own people. There are chemical and biological weapons that he has not accounted for, including 5,000 liters of anthrax. (That's 5 million times the amount that caused thousands of government employees to be screened and treated.) Combine these weapons of mass destruction with the terrorist cells scattered throughout the world, and you have a sure recipe for disaster. If the United States simply ignores the situation, then we are basically relying on the sanity and good will of Saddam Hussein. Being that he has proved untrustworthy time and time again, that is not a gamble our government was willing to take. In a nutshell, those are the basic arguments used to justify the war from a Catholic perspective. This is by no means meant to be an exhaustive study of that position, but I hope that it has given you food for thought! Peace, Sound off! Tell me what you think! Copyright 2002 by Brandon Jubar |
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
