[Peace-discuss] War crime

[John W.]

At 05:44 PM 9/26/2007, C. G. Estabrook wrote:

>But it shouldn't be.
>
>Chomsky remarked years ago, "If you assume that there's no hope, you
>guarantee that there will be no hope.  However, if you assume that such
>a thing as an instinct for freedom exists, then hope may be justified,
>and it may be possible to build a better world. That's your choice."
>
>And I think Justice Jackson did realize what he was doing. He said at 
>Nuremberg, "If certain acts of violation of treaties are crimes, they are 
>crimes whether the United States does them or whether Germany does them, 
>and we are not prepared to lay down a rule of criminal conduct against 
>others which we would not be willing to have invoked against us .... We 
>must never forget that the record on which we judge these defendants is 
>the record on which history will judge us tomorrow. To pass these 
>defendants a poisoned chalice is to put it to our own lips as well."
>
>--CGE


No, it shouldn't be.

But as Laurie has pointed out, talk is cheap.  And it's not an instinct for 
freedom he's talking about here; it's an instinct for self-preservation and 
double standards of "justice", which I submit is an even stronger instinct 
in human beings.

I haven't read the entirety of Jackson's words re Nuremburg, but I'm 
guessing that he did NOT say, "Hey, I have a great idea!  As long as we're 
convened here, trying war crimes, why don't we just try the United States 
for its role in the Spanish-American War?  We can round up a few old 
veterans of that war and FRY their asses!"

Anyway, it's a pity that the estimable Justice Jackson is dead, and no one 
in any of the three branches of the current administration is taking the 
same high moral tone.  Didn't I read somewhere where Bush has refused to 
even subject the United States to the jurisdiction of the International War 
Crimes Tribunal?

John Wason



>Laurie at advancenet.net wrote:
>
>>Statements are so easy to make and good quotes are so very easy to come 
>>up with; but it comes clear in the light of historic actions that they 
>>are mainly rationalizations and legitimizing explanations that people use 
>>to justify their own behaviors while condemning others' behaviors.  One 
>>should have asked Jackson why the U.S. government and its officials were 
>>not taken to take under the law for starting many of the Indian wars.  It 
>>couldn't have been because the
>>white man won or could it?
>>
>>To further play devil's advocate, one could questionably make a case for 
>>the fact that the Allies at the conclusion of WWI set the conditions that 
>>provoked the start of WWII, although not necessarily the strategies, 
>>tactics, and inhumane behaviors.  How again did the indiscriminate 
>>inhuman violence perpetrated against certain classes or populations of 
>>civilians by the Germans differ from that the Americans against the 
>>American Indians, the Japanese-Americans, against Mexican-Americans and 
>>the Chinese in America, the residents of Dresden, or the cities on which 
>>the atomic bombs were dropped? One does not have to restrict this to the 
>>U.S.; one can turn to the Spanish Inquisition, the UK in Northern Ireland 
>>or India, the French in Algeria, etc.
>>
>>It is all about power politics where the winner defines the rules of 
>>right and wrong.
>>
>>
>>
>>>-----Original Message----- From: 
>>>peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net [mailto:peace-discuss- 
>>>bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of C. G. Estabrook Sent: 
>>>Wednesday, September 26, 2007 3:16 PM To: Peace Discuss Subject: 
>>>[Peace-discuss] War crime
>>>
>>>We must make clear to the Germans that the wrong for which their fallen 
>>>leaders are on trial is not that they lost the war, but that they 
>>>started it. --U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson, U.S. 
>>>representative to the international Conference on Military Trials, 
>>>August 12, 1945
>>>
>>>To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international 
>>>crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other 
>>>war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the 
>>>whole. --Nuremberg War Tribunal regarding wars of aggression