Rules for going to war.

Where no two people are likely to agree.
User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10210
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Rules for going to war.

Postby Lance Kennedy » Fri Jul 14, 2017 10:52 pm

The world has its Geneva Convention. We have the World Court. We have assorted international laws, which permit individuals or nations to be reined in and possibly even brought to trial. But there are still wars and crimes against humanity. There are still people fighting and killing.

It occurs to me that some equivalent is needed for actually going to war. When some moron like George W. Bush can charge off to war in order to open new sources of oil for his buddies, there is something seriously wrong. Why do we not have international laws governing when it is OK to go to war ? Let me propose a couple.

Going to war against another nation is permitted only when
1. Your nation is attacked by another nation.
2. Your ally is attacked by another nation. You are then permitted to assist.

Prohibitions might include not being permitted to go to war in the case of
1. Another nation suffering civil war or domestic insurgents. You are not permitted to send your soldiers to assist.
2. A criminal faction in another nation attacking you, but not the other nation itself attacking you. In such cases, it might be reasonable for the other nation to be required to cooperate in rounding up the criminals for trial.
3. Going to war to interfere in the internal politics of another nation.

International law could then specify that the national leader who broke those rules is subject to arrest and trial in the World Court for crimes against humanity.

Feel free to tell me of reasonable restrictions or conditions I have left out. Obviously, what I stated above is just a beginning. I am also aware of the difficulties in policing such laws, but the existence of the laws is, at least, a start, and will illuminate the wrongness of many wars. If nothing else, a national leader will be aware than if he sends his nation to war against the rules, he will be subject to major criticism.
Last edited by Lance Kennedy on Fri Jul 14, 2017 10:58 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19785
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: Rules for going to war.

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Fri Jul 14, 2017 10:54 pm

Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11033
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Rules for going to war.

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Jul 15, 2017 12:52 am

Lance: as you note, we already have "Laws" of war. What we don't have is any enforcement entity that is not the law violaters themselves. It should be the UN, but the UN is expressly prohibited from such acitivities by the nations that would fund such activities with men, money, and machines because they (USA, Russia, France...etc) don't want their druthers interfered with.

No world peace until the UN is so funded.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10210
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Rules for going to war.

Postby Lance Kennedy » Sat Jul 15, 2017 1:33 am

I agree, Bobbo.
But I think enforcement may not be totally needed. If the rules exist on what kind of war is OK to wage, and what is not OK, then there will be other kinds of pressure.

Imagine that there was a rule saying no nation can go to war to interfere with a foreign governments internal politics, and Dubya wanted to invade Iraq, to overturn Saddam Hussein , then hopefully the news media and public pressure would stop him. 400,000 people would not have died.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11033
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Rules for going to war.

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Jul 15, 2017 1:38 am

Thats more tongue in cheek ................. right? I thought it was 1MM.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10210
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Rules for going to war.

Postby Lance Kennedy » Sat Jul 15, 2017 3:57 am

You are correct, Bobbo, in that the number is uncertain. The body count was 173,000, but most bodies were not seen. Estimates range up to one million. I picked 400,000 as a compromise figure, but we simply do not know.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7620
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Rules for going to war.

Postby TJrandom » Sat Jul 15, 2017 5:52 am

Maybe we need laws requiring nations to go to war. For example, all nations will attack any nation which first initiates a war against any nation. Maybe adding - that the attacked nation shall have the right of first refusal to take over such attacking country upon cessation of hostilities.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8229
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Rules for going to war.

Postby Poodle » Sat Jul 15, 2017 6:15 am

Lovely idea, Lance. But who enforces the rules? It would have to be the UN, but at the moment, that august body is hamstrung by the veto in the Security Council. Remove the veto, redefine the Council's role, create an effective standing UN reaction force and streamline the means of getting it moving, gee up the dodderers in the International Court of Justice and then fund it all adequately - well, then we might have a chance of getting something like you describe.
If wishes were horses, beggars would ride (a very old English saying which seems apropos).

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10210
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Rules for going to war.

Postby Lance Kennedy » Sat Jul 15, 2017 7:46 am

Poodle

As I said, enforcement may not always be needed. The disapproval of the media, the general public, and other nations would be a disincentive to breaking the rules. These things can be surprisingly powerful. Outside of those nations who have the veto, other nations may exercise pressure.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11033
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Rules for going to war.

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Jul 15, 2017 9:03 am

Poodle wrote:Lovely idea, Lance. But who enforces the rules? It would have to be the UN, but at the moment, that august body is hamstrung by the veto in the Security Council. Remove the veto, redefine the Council's role, create an effective standing UN reaction force and streamline the means of getting it moving, gee up the dodderers in the International Court of Justice and then fund it all adequately - well, then we might have a chance of getting something like you describe.
If wishes were horses, beggars would ride (a very old English saying which seems apropos).


Yea, Verily..............and give that about 5 years if it could EVER come about...............and BREXIT would break out all over the place.

Kumbaya...a naive belief system that doesn't work among any 10 randomly assigned individuals........much less 183 heavily invested Nation States.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

Tom Palven
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4831
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: Rules for going to war.

Postby Tom Palven » Tue Sep 26, 2017 5:02 am

If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire

User avatar
Upton_O_Goode
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2740
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:15 am
Custom Title: Dear [Salutation][First Name]
Location: The Land Formerly Known as Pangea

Re: Rules for going to war.

Postby Upton_O_Goode » Tue Sep 26, 2017 11:38 am

Tom Palven wrote:Ron Paul says Give peace a chance:
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2017/09/ron ... ea-crisis/


I've noticed that one clear distinction between conservatives and libertarians is that conservatives really like having a huge military and using it frequently, whereas libertarians rightly regard it as coercion of the taxpayer. I'm neither conservative nor libertarian, but of the two, I like libertarians better, as long as they are not too consistent. (Ron Paul fits this description to a small degree. When asked if he would refuse medical treatment to someone who had refused to buy insurance, he flinched and said he wouldn't, even though the crowd at the debate was chanting, "Yes, let 'im die!" As a further digression, I note that this exchange shows what thick-headed imbeciles reporters can be. He should have been asked about the hypothetical patient's 13-year-old daughter with leukemia. Would they let HER die because her old man didn't buy insurance?)

About the Gulf of Tonkin incident that is mentioned in the link, it should have been pointed out that the attack on the Arrow was PROVOKED by South Vietnamese shelling of the coast of North Viet Nam. What I fear is that we'll get a similar shelling of the coast of North Korea, maybe ironically by the South Koreans. We won't be told about it, but it will provoke a hostile action by North Korea. After that....Armageddon.
"Reserve a part of your wrath ; you have not seen the worst yet. You suppose that this war has been a criminal blunder and an exceptional horror ; you imagine that before long reason will prevail, and all these inferior people that govern the world will be swept aside, and your own party will reform everything and remain always in office. You are mistaken."

George Santayana, "Tipperary" (1918)

User avatar
OlegTheBatty
True Skeptic
Posts: 10521
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:35 pm
Custom Title: Uppity Atheist

Re: Rules for going to war.

Postby OlegTheBatty » Tue Sep 26, 2017 3:23 pm

Upton_O_Goode wrote: After that....Armageddon.


Yes, that. Luring NK into striking first has to fool China, not just our easily fooled western news media.
. . . with the satisfied air of a man who thinks he has an idea of his own because he has commented on the idea of another . . . - Alexandre Dumas 'The Count of Monte Cristo"

There is no statement so absurd that it has not been uttered by some philosopher. - Cicero


Return to “Politics and Government”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest