Syria and the Just War Theory

More on Syria, y'all. Yeah, it's like that. This whole clown-show we have running our government really has things going swell. Since Congress is now "debating" whether or not to authorize the President to use military force a/k/a DECLARE WAR on Syria, let's talk about that for a moment. 

First, let's not kid ourselves. The President has proposed a "time-limited and scope-limited action" against Syria. Ok, what does that mean exactly?

It likely means we are going to launch missiles from submarines or surface ships and blow up buildings in Syria that are military targets such as military headquarters, bridges, radar sites, etc. We're going to blow up stuff in a foreign country with missiles and kill people.

Now, I grant you, it's not exactly the Normandy Invasion, but it certainly ain't junior prom, either. Whatever you want to call it, I guarantee you the people who are killed by missile attacks will not like it. They'll probably consider it war. Remember when two airplanes slammed into the twin towers? What did we consider that to be?

So, as our President likes to say, let me be clear: It's a declaration of War that he's seeking from Congress. It's not a big war. It's just a small, short war. And we're confident that the enemy will not be able to respond by bringing the war back to the US.

Also, the proposal from President Obama doesn’t satisfy the conditions of Just War theory. For those of you scoring at home, the conditions of the Just War Theory:

This is a big, over-simplification, but the basic three elements of a Just War are traditionally:

1. Just Cause;

2. Just Authority; and

3. Just Result/Intent.

Punishment is never a just cause. Defense of others is, but that’s not Obama’s proffered justification. He says he wants to “punish” chemical weapon usage. He also lacks Just Authority. He refused to go to the UN because in the words of an administration official, it would be pointless. Finally, the proposed war lacks a Just Result/Intention, since he says he wants to hurt others, but not to the point of causing their surrender.

That’s just the traditional Just War theory. If you want to add the modern elements of:

4. Proportionality; and,

5. Last Resort.

it gets even worse. Proportionality means that the benefits of war are proportional to the evils of war. “Saving face” is not proportional to killing people. And that's what the President has proposed. He wants to show that he means what he says, even when he says dumb things. And finally, there’s no argument that Obama’s “just enough not to be mocked” war could ever be a “last resort”. (Also, too late on that one, Skippy.)

Anyone in Congress who votes for this moronic little war throws the Just War theory out the window.

Now don't get me wrong. I'm not saying there's no way we can strike Syria without it being a Just War, but the proffered military strategy here of "let's just dock Assad's allowance and move on" ain't it.