Pat Buchanan Asks "Are America's Wars 'Just And Moral'?"

Tyler Durden's picture

Authored by Patrick Buchanan via,

“One knowledgeable official estimates that the CIA-backed fighters may have killed or wounded 100,000 Syrian soldiers and their allies,” writes columnist David Ignatius.

Given that Syria’s prewar population was not 10 percent of ours, this is the equivalent of a million dead and wounded Americans. What justifies America’s participation in this slaughter?

Columnist Eric Margolis summarizes the successes of the six-year civil war to overthrow President Bashar Assad.

“The result of the western-engendered carnage in Syria was horrendous: at least 475,000 dead, 5 million Syrian refugees driven into exile in neighboring states (Turkey alone hosts three million), and another 6 million internally displaced. … 11 million Syrians … driven from their homes into wretched living conditions and near famine.


“Two of Syria’s greatest and oldest cities, Damascus and Aleppo, have been pounded into ruins. Jihadist massacres and Russian and American air strikes have ravaged once beautiful, relatively prosperous Syria. Its ancient Christian peoples are fleeing for their lives before US and Saudi takfiri religious fanatics.”

Realizing the futility of U.S. policy, President Trump is cutting aid to the rebels. And the War Party is beside itself. Says The Wall Street Journal:

“The only way to reach an acceptable diplomatic solution is if Iran and Russia feel they are paying too high a price for their Syria sojourn. This means more support for Mr. Assad’s enemies, not cutting them off without notice. And it means building up a Middle East coalition willing to fight Islamic State and resist Iran. The U.S. should also consider enforcing ‘safe zones’ in Syria for anti-Assad forces.”

Yet, fighting ISIS and al-Qaida in Syria, while bleeding the Assad-Iran-Russia-Hezbollah victors, is a formula for endless war and unending terrors visited upon the Syrian people.

What injury did the Assad regime, in power for half a century and having never attacked us, inflict to justify what we have helped to do to that country?

Is this war moral by our own standards?

We overthrew Saddam Hussein in 2003 and Moammar Gadhafi in 2012. Yet, the fighting, killing and dying in both countries have not ceased. Estimates of the Iraq civilian and military dead run into the hundreds of thousands.

Still, the worst humanitarian disaster may be unfolding in Yemen.

After the Houthis overthrew the Saudi-backed regime and took over the country, the Saudis in 2015 persuaded the United States to support its air strikes, invasion and blockade.

By January 2016, the U.N. estimated a Yemeni civilian death toll of 10,000, with 40,000 wounded. However, the blockade of Yemen, which imports 90 percent of its food, has caused a crisis of malnutrition and impending famine that threatens millions of the poorest people in the Arab world with starvation.

No matter how objectionable we found these dictators, what vital interests of ours were so imperiled by the continued rule of Saddam, Assad, Gadhafi and the Houthis that they would justify what we have done to the peoples of those countries?

“They make a desert and call it peace,” Calgacus said of the Romans he fought in the first century. Will that be our epitaph?

Among the principles for a just war, it must be waged as a last resort, to address a wrong suffered, and by a legitimate authority. Deaths of civilians are justified only if they are unavoidable victims of a deliberate attack on a military target.

The wars in Syria, Libya and Yemen were never authorized by Congress. The civilian dead, wounded and uprooted in Syria, and the malnourished millions in Yemen, represent a moral cost that seems far beyond any proportional moral gain from those conflicts.

In which of the countries we have attacked or invaded in this century — Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen — are the people better off than they were before we came?

And we wonder why they hate us.

“Those to whom evil is done/Do evil in return,” wrote W. H. Auden in “September 1, 1939.” As the peoples of Syria and the other broken and bleeding countries of the Middle East flee to Europe and America, will not some come with revenge on their minds and hatred in their hearts?

Meanwhile, as the Americans bomb across the Middle East, China rises. She began the century with a GDP smaller than Italy’s and now has an economy that rivals our own.

She has become the world’s first manufacturing power, laid claim to the islands of the East and South China seas, and told America to keep her warships out of the Taiwan Strait.

Xi Jinping has launched a “One Belt, One Road” policy to finance trade ports and depots alongside the military and naval bases being established in Central and South Asia.

Meanwhile, the Americans, $20 trillion in debt, running $800 billion trade deficits, unable to fix their health care system, reform their tax code, or fund an infrastructure program, prepare to fight new Middle East war.

Whom the Gods would destroy…

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
SafelyGraze's picture

Stop listening to the bombastic loudmouths on the radio and television and the Internet.

To hell with them!

They don't want anything done for the public good. Our incapacity is their livelihood.

Let's trust each other.

Let's return to regular order.


GUS100CORRINA's picture

Pat Buchanan Asks "Are America's Wars 'Just And Moral'?"

My response: In order to answer the question, we need to define what we mean by JUST and MORAL! Unfortunately, the only place those terms are defined is in the BOOK that no one reads anymore. I will let you guess which BOOK I am referring to in this post

gigadeath's picture

9/11 wasnt just an inside job. It was an obvious inside job.

armada's picture

"What justifies America’s participation in this slaughter?"

All MidEast WARS only benefit IsraHell.

ThirteenthFloor's picture

Buchanan is at least 53 years late with that one.

At this rate we might get to Wall Street and FRB morality by 2061.

Captain Chlamydia's picture

That BOOK can not be the bible - the blood drips off the  pages.

You must mean War is a Racket by Smedly

That would make sense.

micksavage2010's picture

captain u b my new hero with ur post to that wacko gus..

grizfish's picture

There is no justice and morality in war.  From my experience it is more like "kill or be killed."

The neocons and congress justify the means (war) by focusing on the end (global domination).

Their children will not become cannon fodder, but yours could.  

Eyes Opened's picture

Bullshit...u mean a person cannot live a Moral life & be Just in their dealings with others unless they prostrate themselves before (insert chosen deity) ??

Its the ones who use & abuse "religion" to achieve their own ends that are immoral & unjust.

One doesn't NEED a "book" to know the difference between right & wrong....

I have NO problem with those who choose to follow a faith as long as it does not impinge on my life. So, do NOT go quoting scripture to me.

My "religion" ??


micksavage2010's picture

let me guess which book ur referring to u wacko: the dictionary, movie guide for 2017, chilton's auto repair manual for 1970 chevy, place name of arizona, modern standard arabic, all about the flying spaghetti monster, or my pet goat - i could continue but i'm sure anyone but u can get the point. ur BOOK has been and is the cause of more death and misery than i could create as a horror fiction author. and what outlandish stories and moral tales it contains.

Oldwood's picture

Fuck McCain. Brain cancer is an insufficient excuse.

what happened's picture

The problem is they have infiltrated the citizens through the state and federal pension system, promising those employed by them the benefits other countries have.  Meanwhile they do some of the dirty work and keep their mouths shut regarding the corruption that has permiated all levels of government.

bigdumbnugly's picture

nope, they're just more ill.

Bay of Pigs's picture

No Pat, they are not just or moral. Just the opposite.

Paul Kersey's picture

Pat was a big proponent of the Vietnam war, a war that caused the deaths of close to 3 million Asians. It was Kennedy's and LBJ's (Gulf of Tonkin) false flag war, but Pat adopted it for his own. Now, at 78 years of age he's starting to finally figure it all out.

GUS100CORRINA's picture

Pat Buchanan Asks "Are America's Wars 'Just And Moral'?"

My response: Pat is listening too much to MSM and his DEEP STATE contacts.

LetThemEatRand's picture

I think Buchanan needs to see a shrink about his multiple personality disorder. 



order66's picture

Pat writes what he thinks people on ZH will read. Nothing more. He's pandering and you're eating it up.

LetThemEatRand's picture

You post here more than I do so who is doing the eating?  And I've been quite critical of Buchanan in the past.  See the comments.


Bay of Pigs's picture

Don't bother engaging that dummie. A waste of your time.

Give Me Some Truth's picture

So Pat is "pandering" to an audience that thinks these wars are unjust and immoral. Counterproductive to boot. Not declared - thus illegal - as well. Unaffordable too (if this even matters).

I guess he could be pandering to the audience who thinks these wars are great and necessary and have accomplished wonderful things. I'd argue that we have enough of those people though. 

Don't you think SOMEONE needs to challenge such people?

Yen Cross's picture

  Do you have a huge brain tumor Pat?

order66's picture

America's wars exist to siphon taxpayer money into the military contractor supply chain. Nothing more.

LetThemEatRand's picture

There is more, and that is where Buchanan falls short.  The wars are also fought to enrich bankers who create the money that funds the MIC.   Buchanan fails to see the connection between bankers and the MIC, which is why he still thinks Nixon and Reagan were good folk.

Radical Marijuana's picture

Making the World Safe for Banksters: Syria in the Cross-hairs

The international banksters of "finance capital"
operated through methods of organized crime,
to legalize the frauds of private banks making
"money" out of nothing, as debts, which was
NOT "capitalism," nor even any adjectives
that modified that word of "capitalism!"

It is a fascist plutocracy conspiracy, where the
primary source of the wealth of the plutocrats is
the ability to make money out of nothing as debts,
while the governments force everyone else to agree.


All Wars Are Bankers’ Wars

Mr Twitch's picture

No.  More to it than that.

order66's picture

Pat Buchanan Asks "Are America's Wars 'Just And Moral'?"

Pat Buchanan's Readers Ask "What the fuck are you smokin' bro?"

homiegot's picture

If we don't win them, no.

wisehiney's picture

Bomb a bunch of poor twenty year old stiff dicks and then show them all of that nice pussy on the streets and on TV.

None of which they can have.

Until they kill kill kill and then get to go to their 69 virgins.

No fucking wonder.

FlKeysFisherman's picture

Whom the Gods would destroy…


they first make mad.

Stinkworx's picture

I know nothing of Buchanan but, at the very least, he is calling these murderous illegal wars out for what they are.


America will eventually pay for all of this carnage. The sad part will be the people who will pay will be the normal guy in the street who had no say in stopping it in the 1st place.

zen0's picture

The normal guy in the street is the guy that keeps signing up to go and fight in these wars.

When he stops, then things might change, or maybe they will just get others to do the work that Americans won't do?

Give Me Some Truth's picture

Yep. "The normal guy in the street" has been brainwashed. He - and she - thinks these wars are being waged to "protect our freedoms."

I sometimes ask these people - what "freedoms" of ours are the Syrians stealing? The Iraquis? Afghans?

To make it even simpler for them, I ask: "You know, if we had never gone to war in Afghanistan or Iraq (or now Syria and Yemen) would you no longer have the 'freedom of speech.' or the 'freedom of religion?'

And where in our Constitution did it say our government was created to "spread democracy to far away lands?"


meditate_vigorously's picture

That man on the street will be paying for the crime of not rising up against his criminal government. We all live our lives on credit when we do nothing. Debts will be collected.

rejected's picture

Are Americas wars 'just and moral'?

What a stupid question!  


And we and our children 'we love soooo much' will pay a supreme price. Lunatics, 99% of the nation.

Ms No's picture

He knows better.  He isn't an idiot.  He speaks of "rebels".  That's engaging in cover up really.  They are all gaming us and it's getting pretty old.  If the tide turns toward the people it will be curious to compare how much they change their tune.


jamesmmu's picture
BREAKING NEWS: Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s IT Man, Imran Awan Caught Trying To Flee The Country!

FoggyWorld's picture

And magically he is already on bail and out and free to try again.

meditate_vigorously's picture

" Deaths of civilians are justified only if they are unavoidable victims of a deliberate attack on a military target."

No, Buchanan, you cuck. The GOAL of war is to kill civilians. The purpose of the military is to keep the enemy from doing that. Any other definition of war is barbaric for the evils it disguises. It is rather tempting to enter a war under Buchancan's definition, though it has no basis in the reality of human history or human behavior. War should be avoided, because it IS brutal. Trying to dress it up in morality is a great evil.

historian40's picture

It is under "modern warfare" that civilians have become a target.  Unless you're a barbarian.  There have been rules of war between "civilized" nations.

The goal of war is to defeat the enemy, not to lay waste to populations.  It's actually detrimental to your cause if your goal is simply to kill a bunch of people, because it only draws more into armed conflict against you out of an otherwise uninvolved people.

Anarchyteez's picture

That was rhetorical right ?

It's the right question we should all always ask, but what the fuck man ? We suck. The MIC runs the show.

FoggyWorld's picture

That brings forth another question.   Why do they run our show?

NonExistentFundamentals's picture

I, for one, am very happy we are no longer arming Syrian Rebels. Remember what happened when we armed the Afgani's in the 80's... yeah... the Taliban happened.

cherry picker's picture

I wonder how a pilot feels after finding out his bombs killed a bunch of kids?  Does he ever wonder what he would feel if it were his children?

Does the average soldier even know why they are fighting over there or are they just following orders?

I don't see anything representing defending America, do you?

Why is USA supporting Al Queda, the so called perpetrator of 9-11?

No wonder vets are screwed up when they return.

I wouldn't be surprised one day a bunch of vets got together to put a stop to this shit.

historian40's picture

A lot of suicides.  They just refer to the cause as "PTSD" instead of guilt.  They're even saying the drone operators are suffering from "PTSD" when it's much more likely they're simply feeling guilt for what they are causing with those machines.

Ms No's picture

Holy shit Pat!  They are supporting ISIS! 

Reaper's picture

Just and moral are relative terms. Death and choosing to kill aren't relative. Which God or political dogma decides for you? Why has your god or political dogma chosen you to kill? Are you sure? Will your god or historical destiny accept a Nuremberg defense? The essence of homo sapien (wise man) is the ability to think and chose.

Just and moral makes you responsible for your choice.