the new sheriff in the old west
by Jason Bradley
Published: January 1, 2008
To borrow an analogy of Greg Thielmann of the Senate Intelligence Committee, consider the following:
It is the old west. The bad guy, dressed in black from hat to boots, rides into the town of Cactus Gulch with his ne’er-do-well gang. They have been robbing banks and stagecoaches throughout the republic. They enter town, weapons drawn, intent on another heist. But the dear sheriff, bedecked in white, complete with a shiny, silver star emblazoned on his chest and silver-plated six-shooters on his hips, has prepared. He has assembled his deputies on rooftops, behind barrels and in store windows. The sheriff’s men open fire. The bad guys put up a fight, but are eventually shot or hung by the good folks. And life returns to normal, tumbleweeds rolling by and all.
Or consider this: Same scenario, but the sheriff ambushes the evil-doers outside of town before they have a chance of harming the fair citizens of Cactus Gulch, considered by all a successful pre-emptive attack.
Or this: The sheriff has heard that there are some bad men outside of town. They haven’t done anything violent, yet. But the sheriff feels it in his gut that they are up to no good. He does a little investigation. Unfortunately, he is just not able to confirm his suspicions with hard evidence. The bad men profess over and over again that they have only the best intentions and that they mean no harm to the good people of the republic. But our sheriff smells trouble and is determined to put an end to it. He sends his posse out to round up or kill the bad men, which they do. And although the posse can’t produce evidence of any assemblage of weapons, or plans to attack any towns of the republic. The sheriff claims victory, his mission accomplished by a successful preventive strike.
But what might have been acceptable in the old west is not in modern times.
Modern law is clear: The Nuremburg trials following World War II set the code of conduct deemed the standard for all nations.
The international council banned any and all unprovoked attacks by one nation against another, as the Second World War was initiated September 1, 1939, when the Nazis attacked Poland without provocation.
The council determined the act of the Nazis as an act of aggression, which led to uncountable deaths over the next six years.
Article VI of the Nuremburg Charter defines “Crimes Against Peace” as the “planning, preparation, initiation or waging of war of aggression, or a war in violation of international treaties… or participation in a common plan or conspiracy… to wage an aggressive war.”
A week before the unprovoked Nazi assault on Poland, Hitler promised his staff that he would provide, “… a propagandistic reason for starting the war.” Hitler justified the strike based on lies about a pending Polish attack against Germany.
“The victor will not be asked afterwards whether he told the truth or not,” Hitler told his military leaders. “In starting and waging a war it is not right that matters, but victory.”
After Hitler’s deceptions were revealed at Nuremburg, the surviving Nazis based their defense on the claim of “preventative war,” claiming a need to protect Germany from a pending Polish attack.
They were the last to use that rationale - until now, as the United States ponders its options in its dealings with Iran.
Let’s choose our new sheriff carefully.
—
(email this article or post to social network)
—
