Can one aggressive war be more wrong than another?

[Recursion]

Or is all aggressive war on an equal level of wrongness? Are there better and worse ways to wage bad wars?

[BainsBane]

1. Some wars kill more people

So on that score Iraq is still worse. That, however, doesn't justify Russian invasion of the Ukraine.

[JVS]

2. Would it be better or worse if Kiev had looked like this a few weeks ago?

[Recursion]

3. I would say worse. But it would also be worse if we had annexed Kurdistan, too

But then, apparently, some people get very angry at any distinction between two illegal activities...

[LWolf]

4. I think war is wrong. Period.

I don't think there is a "better" way to wage war.

[jakeXT]

5. it's not a war if Americans can't get hurt

The Obama administration has come up with a remarkable justification for going to war against Libya without the congressional approval required by the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution of 1973

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/jun/22/libya-war-kinetic-military-action

[BainsBane]

8. Every administration since 1973 has done that

It doesn't make it right that the Obama administration did so, but nor is it surprising.

[joshcryer]

10. Obama has not at any time acted outside of international law.

Or domestic law when it regards foreign policy. That is a fact.

Bush is a war criminal who not only committed treason by lying to the American public but acted outside of the UN in his illegal and criminal invasion of Iraq.

In fact, Obama has reigned in the Unitary Executive, particularly when it came to Syria. We might be able to credit Kerry for that.

[BainsBane]

11. I'm not comparing Obama to Bush

I agree there is no comparison. However, I believe Obama's engagement in Libya after thirty days was a violation of the War Powers Act. I support his presidency, but I have disagreements on specific policies, and that is one of them.

[joshcryer]

12. Fair enough.

However, Odyssey Dawn was 12 days of engagement, then it was handed off to EU NATO partners. The total price tag was about a billion dollars and there was no single casualty on the US side.

(The US did provide intelligence and whatnot after that but I don't think that constitutes aggression, so much providing NATO partners with intel.)

[joshcryer]

9. The US is obligated to follow treaty. R2P was invoked.

Article 42 of the War Powers Act allowed the President to act within the confines of a Security Council Request. The UN Participation Act does not require congressional approval.

Of course, there were DUers calling for his impeachment, so there's that...

[joshcryer]

6. No. They are all equally bad.

[Agnosticsherbet]

7. Just because we have engaged in aggressive war,

does not mean we should not condemn it when we see it.
After all, it is more difficult to see the error of another man's ways than our own.