NY Times Op-Ed: ‘Bomb Syria, Even if It Is Illegal’

John Glaser, August 29, 2013

I really can’t add much to this…

Screen Shot 2013-08-29 at 9.36.24 AM

Here’s the link.

At least it’s an honest argument. And it’s the same for many people now pining for another U.S. war in the Middle East: “the law” is just some antiquated, idealistic notion that doesn’t apply to states, especially when you’re the most powerful nation on Earth…our might makes it right.




10 Responses to “NY Times Op-Ed: ‘Bomb Syria, Even if It Is Illegal’”

  1. 'We are a nation of laws.' What a farce.

  2. Positive law is fallible…it doesn’t always coincide with natural law. Thus, the argument that you shouldn’t do something because it is illegal doesn’t hold up since the law can in itself be unjust. So I agree with him on this point. But aggressing against Individuals to fund the war (taxation) and potentially aggressing against non-participants (civilians) is unjust regardless of its “legality”.

  3. Yea but it's NOT HONEST, only the headline is honest, read the last paragraphs:

    "It must either argue that an “illegal but legitimate” intervention is better than doing nothing, or assert that international law has changed — strategies that I call “constructive noncompliance.” In the case of Syria, I vote for the latter.

    Since Russia and China won’t help, Mr. Obama and allied leaders should declare that international law has evolved and that they don’t need Security Council approval to intervene in Syria.

    This would be popular in many quarters, and I believe it’s the right thing to do. But if the American government accepts that the rule of law is the foundation of civilized society, it must be clear that this represents a new legal path."

    So it's going to pretend the laws have changed when they really haven't, just outright defect from the UN entirely, uh am I missing something? It doesn't even argue the laws should be changed by whatever process is in place, but just to assert the law is something else. Imagine Manning: yes sir what I did was illegal under previous laws, but the laws have changed ….

    Oh right, you can't. It's just another variation of: "laws are for the little people". Which come to think of it is all we ever get from the elite anyway, isn't it?

  4. It's worthwhile reading our Thucydides once again. The idea that "might makes right" combined with a culture of charismatic, "celebrity" leaders is a recipe for disaster.

  5. OK, so if the author advocates the notion that "there are moral reasons for [the government} to disregard the law", and the responsible officials are not jailed, then opponents of the war can say "there are moral reasons for disregarding the law on paying taxes to support the government" and not have to go to jail.

  6. Can US war makers be called "Narcissistic Abusers ?" They fit the classic profile.

  7. I hope all antiwar.com readers will be out protesting this Nazi aggression.

  8. If we MUST bomb another Middle Eastern country, why can't it be Israel?

  9. Obama can not even declare NO fly zone on IsraelME.OPEX declare war on Quran/Muslims but Mursi did not listen.

  10. The United States and the OTAN aren't the world police. We MUST oppose to their new war.