I have heard all of the arguments 100 times, at least. We need to fight them over there or we’ll end up fighting them over here. The government knows things that we don’t and it doesn’t tell us everything. The Muslims hate us for our freedom, or they hate us and want to kill us because that is what the Koran tells them to do. Congress ‘authorized’ military action in Iraq, so it was okay, etc., etc., ad nauseum.
Ultimately, these arguments all hinge on the last argument- Congress gave the President authority to go to war, so it must be okay. How long will we allow ourselves to be subject to the control of the thought controllers? Let’s consider this same argument used in the real world setting, and let me know if you think it still applies.
Scene 1: A beautiful young lady is strolling down the street and I comment on how lovely she looks. You authorize me to have sex with this young lady. I do so and get charged with numerous crimes such as: rape, kidnapping, holding her against her will, etc. The Lord also charges me with adultery and fornication.
Scene 2: I need some transportation to get you to the hospital, or a joy ride, or the liquor store, or some other noble purpose. You authorize me to use a sports car that happens to parked close by. I take it and get charged with grand theft auto, at least.
Scene 3: I’m homeless and need a place to live. You authorize me to move into a certain house and to evict its occupants; by force if necessary. I do so and get charged with too many crimes to list.
The question I have for you, my military apologist friend is: why am I being charged with crimes when I have done nothing more than what you have given me the authority to do?
Of course, as you readily recognize, the problem is that you did not have the authority in the first place, therefore, you were not able to delegate that authority to me.
Now, my friend, if you are unable to delegate authority which you do not possess, what makes you think that Congress is any different?
“But,” you say, “the Constitution gives them the authority to declare war.”
Yes, it does. However, war was not declared, neither does the Constitution give them the authority to abdicate any of their responsibilities. Indeed, the Constitution was designed specifically to prevent any one person or any one branch from ever acquiring too much authority and power. So, just as you cannot give me authority that you never rightfully had, neither can Congress. And, just as you may not have committed any crime by giving me this authority, you are considered an accessory to the crime if you participated or if you had good reason to believe that I would act upon your authorization. The same is true of Congress; they are guilty if they in any way participated in the crime committed or if they had reason to believe that the President would act upon their authorization.
What about the president, is he guilty of any wrong doing? Well, just as I would have been arrested and charged with crimes for acting in any of the above scenarios, so should he. A President who commits a crime against his own country commits the crime of treason. When the President chooses to act upon what he knows, or has reason to suspect is an illegitimate authority, then he becomes guilty, just as I would be held accountable in our illustrations.
However, the President cannot actually act on this authority, so called, without the aid and assistance of a gang of armed mercenaries who will unquestioningly do as they are told. I know, my friend, you don’t like the terms gang and mercenaries when used in reference to our military, but let’s call them what they are. A military comes to the defense of its nation when under attack. A gang attacks ‘preemptively’ to set an example and to increase the size of its turf. A military holds its leaders accountable to the oath they swore to God Almighty, since the military has sworn the same oath. A gang does whatever they are told with no thought to right or wrong. A military upholds justice by strictly adhering to the rule of law. A gang perverts justice by arbitrarily declaring their own law. A military allows anyone who doesn’t want to participate to leave, at any time. A gang only allows one to leave upon the decree of the leader.
A military acts only when necessary for the repelling of foreign invaders. Mercenaries make a career out of killing and occupying. A military works to ensure that, as much as possible, only enemies get killed. Mercenaries kill with impunity, caring not whether innocent civilians die. A military takes no joy in killing. Mercenaries kill with sadistic glee.
I know that many of my military apologist friends will attempt to justify or explain away all of the issues raised. My hope in writing this is that one of you is spurred to actually think for yourself and to shun blind obedience. Remember, during the Nuremburg trials it was declared that the defense of “just following orders” was not a defense. That individuals had the right as well as the duty to disobey orders when they went against God’s law.
No comments:
Post a Comment