 |
| Photo: Charles Dharapak |
The use of chemical weapons against civilians is a human tragedy with moral urgency, but the United States should not intervene in Syria because the conditions for a "just war" have not been met, according to two Southern Baptist ethicists.
Russell D. Moore, president of the Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, said in an article on Religion News Service Sept. 3 that the regime of Syrian President Bashar al Assad is "lawless and tyrannical," and the first principle of just war -- a just cause -- has been met.
"That said, there are other principles missing here, both to justify action morally and to justify it prudentially," Moore stated.
Daniel Heimbach, senior professor of Christian ethics at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, offered a slightly different take on Syria, stating that the United States lacks a basis for intervening "in the internal affairs of a distinctly sovereign and separate state."
"I see here no legitimately interpreted just cause sufficient to justify the United States going to war with Syria merely because parties in a civil war are doing bad things to each other," Heimbach said in comments provided to Baptist Press.
"No one is attacking or threatening to attack the United States or any ally of the United States. In fact, should the U.S. go to war with Syria it will vastly increase the risk of Syrian attack on U.S. allies in the region," said Heimbach, who was instrumental in developing President George H.W. Bush's just war ethic for the 1991 Gulf War when he served as deputy executive secretary of the Domestic Policy Council.
Heimbach noted, "The meaning and interpretation of a just cause for war (in a just war ethic) requires the nation being attacked (Syria) to have done, or to be doing, or to be moving toward doing some terrible wrong toward the attacking nation (United States) -- not merely doing something bad within their own borders against their own people." Keep reading
Kathleen Parker: Just a little bit of war against Syria
Waging a little bit of war is like being a little bit pregnant.
History and human experience tell us that neither is possible, yet we seem bent on believing it. Or, should I say, deceiving ourselves.
President Obama’s call to strategically strike a few targets in Syria to teach President Bashar al-Assad a lesson — and John Kerry’s assertion that this would not be war — should give everyone pause. What would we call it if another country fired missiles our way?
I remember well watching the second plane fly into the second tower on 9/11 and saying to all gathered around the TV: “We’re at war.”
We know it when we see it. Doubtless, the Syrians do too. Keep reading
'Damascus Plan' Imperative for Syria's Christians, Other Minorities
Our allies among the Syrian rebels have issued a memorandum to the State Department on strategies for the day after Assad falls. David Ignatius reports in his column today that the Free Syrian Army (SFA) has outlined a "Damascus plan" for "handling the power vacuum in case of a sudden Assad collapse." This plan is grossly flawed.
Not the least problem, as Ignatius points out, is that the plan relies on the United States - presumably using American troops - to take out not just Assad's stockpiles of chemical weapons but also the command and control for them. President Obama and his chief congressional supporters have ruled out American boots on the ground in Syria. Right? (See Andrew McCarthy's important observation regarding this pledge.) Keep reading
Syrian Christians in Danger if US Attacks, Christian Relief Worker Says
As the U.S. Congress debates authorizing a military strike against the Syrian military for its use of biological weapons against innocent civilians, the impact of such a strike on the Christians in the country has been a cause of concern. To get a better understanding of the situation, The Christian Post spoke with Rupen Das, director for community development and relief at the Lebanese Society for Educational and Social Development.
Das, who is leading the aid efforts in Syria for LSESD, warned that a strike against Syria could make things worse for Christians there, who have already been attacked by some of the anti-Christian rebel forces. Keep reading
FRC's President Tony Perkins on Why Congress Should Oppose Obama's Plan to Bomb Syria
Family Research Council President Tony Perkins said Friday Congress should vote against Barack Obama's plan to attack Syria to punish the Bashar al-Assad regime for using chemical weapons because military action would put Christians and others at risk. The president cannot be trusted to remain within the confines of the law, he added.
Perkins explained his position on Obama's proposed armed intervention in Syria during his daily talk show "Washington Watch" on Friday afternoon.
The FRC head told the listeners he was being asked how he would vote if he were in Congress. "I'd vote 'no,'" Perkins said. "I don't think the president has stated clearly the goals and objectives here that would show us what we need to do to get in and get out." Keep reading
No comments:
Post a Comment