Global Selective Police Action
Declaration of War vs. War against Terrorism

Dear Editor,

What are we fighting against today, that is any different from what we have fought against for centuries? Have the fundamentals of liberty changed with the passage of time and the increase in technology? Is life, liberty and possessions still property of the individual or do these now belong to the state for safekeeping? Or have they ceased to be property at all now?

Have the Laws of Nations changed with the introduction of "terrorism?" Can sovereign nations now go into other sovereign nations and kill a select group of individuals without declaring war on the whole of the nation? How does a nation acquire a right to enter another nation to kill certain individuals and feed other individuals? This is simple! They do not acquire such a right without a full declaration of war! It is legal under the Laws of Nations to declare war among them for wrongs committed against each other. But it can never be legal to enter foreign sovereign nations to bomb and kill only select individuals or groups.

President Bush says that the war on terrorism will include many nations and networks of terrorists. This is a violation of the laws of nations! He may ask these nations to surrender these individuals for trial, punishment or acquittal, but he cannot legally send troops into these nations to selectively murder people. If these nations refuse to cooperate and assist us in bringing these responsible to justice then our legislature may declare war upon the entire obstinate nation in full view of God and mankind. This then frees our military to do what it does best. The declaration of war also does several other nice things for our own nation. The declaration of war is in conformance with our own laws, granting the title of "commander-in-chief of the military" to our President authorizing him to send troops overseas. This act also notifies the American citizen of who the enemy is. It further comforts the citizen with the knowledge that his own government is conforming to the law that created it. When a government abandons the law that created it, the people lose confidence in the integrity of the body out of his control. The citizen, justifiably, begins to have suspicions about the role of his "government" in the affairs that embroil him.

It happens, that eventually the facts surrounding any intrigue, become irrelevant to the citizens that know their own government has abandoned the guide of law to which they agreed was beneficial to them. The people cannot endure a war against an enemy that he knows only by a power that clearly violates the law he does know.

I am, by the way, on President Bush's prayer team. But I don't think they would enjoy my prayers. I pray that we return to the law of this land before it is too late.

Ronald F. Avery