Political Cortex: Brain Food for the Body Politic

My response: It depends on the situation. If an unprovoked aggressor were to cross our borders and attack the United States, I would be in favor of fighting immediate war to defend our country, and I would expect the United Nations to approve of our right to defensive warfare in that unlikely situation. Great Britain was such an aggressor in the war of 1812. However, the context of Mr. Hannity's statement is the current Iraq war. The UN was founded on the principle that offensive war is unjust and violates international law. Therefore, that organization refused to authorize the war in Iraq because it was clearly an offensive, and consequently unjust, war rather than a justified defensive war.

Both Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI have repeatedly emphasized that, for the good of all humanity, the whole world should be involved in the decision-making process concerning matters which affect international peace and security. According to Pope John Paul II, a war in Iraq could not be justified without United Nations authorization. Pope Benedict has echoed this opinion, remarking that "decisions about war and peace should be made by the community of nations, not a particular power [such as the United States]." In other words, the UN should function--as it does, albeit with some serious imperfections--as an indispensable instrument of global democracy.

A great example of the UN functioning properly was the war in Afghanistan. In this case, the US and the UK led an authorized multilateral force into that Middle Eastern country to overthrow an unpopular religious fanatical dictatorship which had been committing scores of well-documented human rights abuses for the past five years. The world community recognized this military action not as an unjust offensive war, but as a just war which aimed to assist the Afghan people in restoring their self-determination and democracy.