In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

90 The War Machine January 23, 2003 These are the words of Supreme Court Justice Robert L. Jackson, Chief US Prosecutor at the Nuremberg Tribunal, August 12, 1945: We must make clear to the Germans that the wrong for which their fallen leaders are on trial is not that they lost the war, but that they started it. And we must not allow ourselves to be drawn into a trial of the causes of the war, for our position is that no grievances or policies will justify resort to aggressive war. It is utterly renounced and condemned as an instrument of policy. And in support of Justice Jackson, Dr. Andreas Toupadakis, who served as a scientist at Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore reminds us of the erroneous thinking that surrounds our contemporary war mania. What is lately often heard are phrases like: “We would support a USled unilateral strike on Iraq only with UN endorsement.” Or, “We would support a unilateral invasion if clear evidence emerged that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.” Or, “There should not be a war with Iraq because there is no proof that Iraq was involved with the 9/11 terrorist attack.” And the list goes on. But all these people with good intention fail to see the lethal trap before their eyes. If the war machine has decided to wage another aggressive war against another nation, it will sooner or later find a reason to justify the war if people ask for one. At the end, if it does not find one, it will create one. And that will not be the first time. What if the United Nations Security Council says tomorrow that it is okay to go to war? What if the inspectors find some nuclear material? Would one gram of plutonium or a ton of it be enough to start the war? What if someone comes and says that there is a link between 9/11 and Iraq? (And of course that person 91 most likely would be speaking “on condition of anonymity”). What then, should the war start? We need to realize that there is absolutely no justification for this war. This war not only risks global catastrophe because it involves the boiling region of the Middle East, an area perhaps more unstable than any other in the world, but it is also immoral and illegal. It is immoral because it punished millions of innocent civilians ten years ago, has been punishing them continually since that time, and will punish them again. It is illegal because Congress gave the illegal authority to the President of the United States to commit aggressive war. For this same kind of war, Nazi and Japanese leaders were held accountable at the Nuremberg and Tokyo trials following World War II. It is also illegal under international law because there is no evidence that Iraq plans to attack the United States. Aggressive war is one of the most serious transgressions of international law. Nothing but organized non-violence can check the organized violence of the American government for now and in the future, if there is going to be a future. ...

Share