Thoughts on the military and military activities of a diverse nature. Free-ranging and eclectic.

Thursday, December 29, 2005

Casus Belli.


This is coolbert:

Many persons who opposed the 2003 invasion of Iraq by U.S. and allied forces and the subsequent occupation cite the lack of a "casus belli" as being a main reason for their opposition.

By "casus belli" we mean:

"Casus belli is a Latin expression from the international law theory of Jus ad bellum. Formally, the expression (which can be translated as "risk of war" or "occasion for war") is the grievances section of a formal public declaration of war by a state, which lists: the grievances it has against another state which are, or may become, the cause of war; the intentions it has in prosecuting the war; and the actions the other state could take to avert conflict or restore peace. The declaration thus seeks to meet the Jus Ad Bellum criteria of "Just Cause", "Public Declaration", and Ultima Ratio ("Last Resort"). However formal declarations of war are rare nowadays, and casus belli is now widely used to simply mean a nation's motives for going to war, without reference to any other formal documents or proposed means of redress, and sometimes without even implying that these motives are just."

Most people DO want to have a very clear and definite "casus belli" before hostilities commence. NOT vague and unclear reasons.

Tom Clancy is one person who cites the lack of "casus belli" as being a motivation for his opposition to the war.

The Chicago Tribune ONLY yesterday gave in the editorial section of the paper NINE reasons cited by the administration as being reasons for going to war. And listed on the same page the "pros" and "cons" of these reasons.

NOT ONE person [or the Chicago Tribune for that matter] has even mentioned this fact about Iraq and the U.S.

In the TWELVE YEARS leading up to the invasion of 2003, THERE WAS AN ALMOST CONTINUOUS SHOOTING WAR GOING ON BETWEEN IRAQI AND U.S. FORCES.

This was the attempt by the air defense forces of Saddam to shoot down ONE U.S. aircraft patrolling the no-fly zone of southern Iraq.

In VIOLATION of the agreement that implemented the TRUCE that ending the ground war between Iraq and the coalition forces in 1991, Iraq WAS NOT TO fly combat aircraft OR move air defense units into the zone that has become the no-fly zone [north and south zones exist]. Without previously agreeing to the no-fly and no air defense requirements, the ground war would have continued.

[Saddam broke this part of the truce from the very start, in 1991, using helicopter gunships to suppress the Shiite revolt in the south of Iraq after the true was implemented.]

Saddam moved air defense units into the no-fly zone of southern Iraq where:

They first had no business being in those locations where found.

Secondly, they could not turn on their radars if THEY WERE THERE [in the no-fly zone]. [just turning on the radars of an air defense unit is considered to be a threat. Just as a person who has a holstered gun places his hand on the gun is considered to be a threat to use the gun!!]

And thirdly, it was totally impermissible to attempt to shoot down OR attempt to shoot down U.S. aircraft patrolling that zone. [this almost goes without saying, does it not??!!]

This the Iraqi, at the command of Saddam, did OVER and OVER. AND DID SO FOR OVER A PERIOD OF TWELVE YEARS!!!

The object of Saddam's mad man intent was to SHOOT DOWN ONE AMERICAN PLANE AND PUT THE PILOT, IF CAPTURED, ON DISPLAY!!

That the air defense forces of Iraq were NOT ABLE over a period of twelve years to shoot down one American plane must go down as just one enormous exercise in futility. Demonstrates an incompetency that is hard to comprehend.

I know this is hard for some folks to understand, but when the military forces of one country shoot upon the military forces of another country, that is USUALLY considered to be WAR. Plain and simple. Saddam, by allowing his air defenses in a callous and untoward manner to shoot at American planes [and the planes of other nations as well], WAS WAR!!

A casus belli existed for TWELVE years prior to the invasion of 2003!!

Go here to see an entire web site devoted to the twelve year casus belli!!

And that is that!!

coolbert.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home