A JUST WAR: Just War: Invading Iraq Was Legally and Morally Correct
In: Nexus, A Journal of Opinion, Jg. 9 (2004), S. 57
Online
academicJournal
Introduction It may yet be that Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction will be located in Iraq or Syria, as much as 30 MiG-15 jet fighters recently were found buried fifteen feet deep under desert sands. If that happens, the American-led invasion of Iraq will have been fully justified by any standard. But what if these weapons are not soon found? Does the absence of chemical and biological weapons weaken the case for the war with Iraq? Based upon the facts we know to exist, and irrespective of our finding these weapons of mass destruction, there can be no question that the overthrow of Hussein's regime was legally correct and morally proper. The War Was Legally Correct As to the legalities, United Nations Resolution 687 ended the 1991 Persian Gulf War and provided that in exchange for the cessation of hostilities, Iraq would unconditionally turn over its weapons and programs of mass destruction to UN representatives. 1 This never happened. The community of nations waited patiently for Hussein to comply. But after twelve years and twelve resolutions, culminating with Resolution 1441, the UN was legally, morally, and politically bound to enforce the terms of Resolution 687. 2 Whether or not preemptive warfare is legally and politically feasible in the age of nuclear or biologically armed terrorists, the invasion of Iraq in 2003 was not a preemptive strike. Rather, it was merely a resumption of hostilities caused by Iraq's failure to comply with the terms of the cease-fire ...
Titel: |
A JUST WAR: Just War: Invading Iraq Was Legally and Morally Correct
|
---|---|
Autor/in / Beteiligte Person: | Shafiroff, Ira L. |
Link: | |
Zeitschrift: | Nexus, A Journal of Opinion, Jg. 9 (2004), S. 57 |
Veröffentlichung: | 2004 |
Medientyp: | academicJournal |
Schlagwort: |
|
Sonstiges: |
|