NOT MORALLY JUSTIFIED?:

Boot, Falk argue ethics of Iraq war (Jessica Spradling, October 15, 2002, The Dartmouth)

After listening to spirited arguments over the moral justification of pre-emptive military action against Iraq nearly 300 members of both the Dartmouth and Upper Valley communities voted overwhelmingly that such an attack was not justified.

For nearly two hours, students, professors and Upper Valley residents filled the seats, the stairwells and the floor of Cook Auditorium to hear Wall Street Journal Editor Max Boot and Princeton University Professor Richard Falk present arguments for and against the war.

Of the 272 votes cast, 217 supported the statement that "The United States is not morally justified at this time in waging preemptive war against Iraq." Three were undecided, and the remainder supported military action.

Among those who identified themselves as Dartmouth students, 71 voted against war and 29 indicated they felt war was justified.

There are perfectly reasonable arguments to be made for not attacking Iraq, but to argue that there's no moral justification suggests that murderous dictators like Saddam Hussein can not be removed by external actors. This seems a dangerous concession to terror.
Posted by Orrin Judd at October 17, 2002 12:36 PM