| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Peace Crimes??? |
| 2005-12-02 |
| Peace Crimes The other day I learned about an effort underway to create a Department of Peace. I donât know the particulars of this effort, but it got me thinking. With all the talk from some on the extreme left about the U.S. military committing War Crimes, I wondered if it would be possible to commit Peace Crimes. What would be a Peace Crime? What would be the specific laws? I know congress will not need my help to draft new laws since I am no lawyer, I offer my services here anyway. I think the new Peace Crimes should exist to prevent acts and punish those people who do things for the sake of peace that compels the U.S. government not to help people in immediate danger of death or even genocide. If a person is trying to help people by claiming to support peace, then it should be expected that the consequences of that personâs actions really bring demonstrated peace to the public. Of course, this legal code would encompass various levels of intent, much like existing criminal law. Those breaking the laws who are doing so out of honest intent and not to win political power should only get a misdemeanor charge depending on the serious nature of the indicted act. Those who donât really care about the people they claim to represent in the name of peace, but utilize any opportunity to degrade the effectiveness of the U.S. military to embarrass the political opposition, would be charged with a felony. I happen to have a few examples in mind to help the reader understand how these Peace Crimes would be enforced under the Department of Peace. Bare in mind, the Peace Crimes would be retroactive in the interest of preserving actual peace as opposed to the imagined peace of the violators. CASE 1. Cindy Sheehan; two counts misdemeanor of Peace Crimes; The first count of the indictment would read: On or about the summer of 2005, Cindy Sheehan began a campaign to impeach the President and force him to bring the troops home immediately. Despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of soldiers and their families opposed Cindy Sheehan, she continued to claim to speak for the sake of the soldiers to remove them from harms way as to incite peace. Furthermore, as it is demonstrated on 9/11 that if the U.S. does not fight terrorists, their organizations, and state sponsors then peace will be achieved until the next time they manage to kill 3000 Americans in a single day. Furthermore, her actions show a profound lack of understanding that this would leave a power vacuum in Iraq and massive civil fighting would ensue killing possibly hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and establish a powerbase for terrorist organizations who were displaced from Afghanistan. Because her actions are based on legitimate and understandable grief, the circumstances only rise to the offense of a misdemeanor. The second count of the indictment would read: Although Cindy Sheehanâs efforts were successful as demonstrated by a drop in confidence of the current President, she continued to press for peace in New Orleans where she demanded that the President withdraw the troops from New Orleans and wondered publicly what it would take to make the soldiers shoot her. Being as the soldiers were providing vital rescue service, security, and logistics support, this Peace Crime would rise to the level of a felony. Given the extenuating circumstances of grief for a fallen son, the charge here will be a misdemeanor. CASE 2 Representative John Murtha; one count 2nd degree felony of Peace Crimes; On or about 12/01/2005, Congressman Murtha declared publicly that the U.S. military was broken. This indictment does not discuss the crime of treason as the person in question is a war hero and appears to love the United States. Rather, the indictment only references the violation of a Peace Crime, 2nd degree felony count. Congressman Murtha is fully aware that every remark he makes in front of the camera goes straight into the ears of U.S. soldiers and their enemies because he experienced the same as a soldier in Vietnam. Yet, he chose to claim that his actions were for the good of the U.S. military, while it is quite clear these acts embolden the enemy. Because it is clear that Mr. Murtha was sincere in his remarks, his intent was not to harm the soldiers, the prosecutorâs office can only assume that Mr. Murtha is perhaps suffering from the early signs of aging. Because Congressman Murtha knows better than to do what he did in order to gain peace for U.S. soldiers, his actions show a unique lack of judgment that puts him in felony violation of the Peace Crime statutes. CASE 3 Senator John Kerry; multiple counts 1st degree felony of Peace Crimes; On or about his announcement of intention to seek the Presidency of the United States in the 2004 election, John Kerry sought to bash the war effort yet support the war effort simultaneously in a most heinous fashion. Mr. Kerry continues to adjust his attitudes on the war to whatever audience he is in front of like a scientist focusing his microscope on a specimen slide of bacteria. Because Mr. Kerry knows the affect his words have on U.S. soldiers, having been âswift boatedâ for slandering U.S. troops fighting in Vietnam, this is a particularly grievous violation. Senator Kerry shows a pattern of inconsistency by accepting medals for a war he claimed was immoral. Furthermore, his own statement of voting for the war, before he voted against it shows a unique ability to seek peace from all sides while only serving to hack everybody off. Because he seeks peace at the cost of anything to anyone that serves his own political agenda, John Kerry will be tried as a repeat offender with a long criminal history of violating the Peace Crimes statutes. Okay, I think that is enough. There are plenty more criminals out there to indict for violating the Department of Peace codes. I canât get them all here, though I imagine Michael Moore will be the next one indicted, but that one would require a review of the evidence by watching his films and nobody here at the prosecutors office can take that incessant dribble long enough to develop the case. - Ray Robison is a Sr. Military Operations Research Analyst with a major defense contractor involved in U.S. Army aviation and missile research. This is a private article not a professional work. His background includes over ten years of military service as an officer and enlisted soldier including the Gulf War and Kosovo operations. Most recently he worked as a contractor for DIA with the Iraqi Survey Group. |
| Posted by:Ray Robison |
| #2 I think the new Peace Crimes should exist to prevent acts and punish those people who do things for the sake of peace that compels the U.S. government not to help people in immediate danger of death or even genocide. bravo! |
| Posted by: 2b 2005-12-02 21:32 |
| #1 Oh, I throw all those anti-sanction activists who played useful fool and allowed Saddam to kill his people under the fake pretext that it was the US's fault. |
| Posted by: Angaviter Elmerelet5732 2005-12-02 14:43 |