We have one of two futures:
- Critical mass of people think, speak, and act to end US/UK/Israel wars.
- Critical mass is not reached, whereby US/UK/Israel continue warring. This includes respites for the illusion “leaders” seek peace.
If you prefer ending these wars, do you also see the following required steps?
- Critical mass of the public understand war law (just as easy to understand as stop sign law, and far easier than sport rules mastered by ~200 million Americans).
- Critical mass command enough of the facts to conclude these wars are illegal; not even close to “self-defense.”
- Critical mass remove consent; cause an end/arrest to the wars.
Does it make sense to stop these wars that literal arrests are practical, ethical, and really the only rational response of Americans who value our constitutional republic to demand?
To enforce war law, arguably the world’s most important law, how are you doing in communicating this demand?
In converse, how can you say you’re an American if war law is Orwellian-violated, resulting in thousands of American soldier deaths and millions of victims of our armed attacks, and literally trillions of our dollars for unlawful wars all based on lies?
Let’s examine a definition and each of these three steps that seem required to end these ongoing US/UK/Israel wars:
Critical mass is similar to a flame causing a piece of paper to catch fire. The flame can spend a long time too far away and too small from the paper to cause any effect. With increased heat and proximity, when critical mass is reached the paper catches paper in a relative moment. In this case, critical mass of public recognition could come quickly (like with several celebrities courageous enough to say the Emperor’s New Clothes truth), or gradually as the public comes to trust what they see clearly with their own two eyes.
- Critical mass of the public understand war law:
Ending the US/UK/Israel wars will follow critical mass conclusion that something is “wrong” with these wars. “Wrong” is an opinion, and historically difficult to translate into policy when US/UK/Israel leaders want wars. “Unlawful” is far more powerful to end a policy.
The two world wars begat two treaties to end nations’ armed attacks. They are crystal-clear in content and context: the Kellogg-Briand Pact (General treaty for renunciation of war as an instrument of national policy as official title), and the United Nations Charter. Article Six of the US Constitution defines a treaty as US “supreme Law of the Land;” meaning that US policy may only complement an active treaty, and never violate it.
With just a little attention, anyone can master this law: war is lawful only in self-defense from armed attack by another nation’s government.
This is similar to the basic version of stop sign law: bring your vehicle to a complete stop behind the stop line or intersection. Proceed only when safe.
Full documentation and explanation:
- Critical mass command enough of the facts to conclude these wars are illegal
Understanding war law is important because all of us with Oaths to the US Constitution are sworn to honorably refuse unlawful war orders; military officers are sworn to arrest those who issue them. Indeed, we suffer criminal dishonor if we obey orders for armed attack when they are not “self-defense” as clearly limited by treaty.
US military JAG authors/attorneys explicitly state on page 6 that war is illegal unless a nation is under attack from another nation’s government, or can provide evidence of imminent threat of such attack:
“Anticipatory self-defense, whether labeled anticipatory or preemptive, must be distinguished from preventive self-defense. Preventive self-defense—employed to counter non-imminent threats—is illegal under international law.”
As many in alternative media have reported for years, the US was not attacked on 9/11 by another nation’s government, and the US explicitly stated they had no evidence of any imminent threat of attack. Indeed, all “reasons” for US wars are now known to be lies known to false as they were told, and disclosed by official US government agencies’ official documents.
Israel war on Gaza is unlawful because Hamas officially asks for peace while Israel engages in hostile military siege by land, sea, and air to slowly strangle Palestinians. Israel’s armed attack violates war law, as does their targeting of civilian infrastructure such as hospitals, schools, refugee centers, water treatment plants, electric plants, etc. Documentation:
- Critical mass remove consent; cause an end/arrest to the wars
If these wars are to end, it will be from public removal of consent, expressed in numerous and creative ways. To achieve this stage, it seems the precursor stages must include recognition of war law, and that these wars are not even close to lawful. The removal of consent for unlawful war would arrest/stop the wars.
This said, the most expedient pathway would be for the public to speak for arrests of the war “leaders” now because it’s so clear the wars they order are unlawful. The arrests would be to stop Wars of Aggression and treason.
Given such arrests would be an absolute reversal of history to-date, this means history provides no precedent to explain how this would happen. Given this lack of precedence, these are possible arrest scenarios (more here):
- Federal law arrests for treason and/or other unlawful orders violating the US Constitution (consider Oath Keepers).
- State arrests for murder of residents under the unlawful lies to send residents to their deaths via unlawful Wars of Aggression.
- Military arrests for unlawful orders, Wars of Aggression.
- International Criminal Court (under similar control as the UN to avoid the biggest War Crimes).
- Citizen’s arrest.
Those interested in taking the lawful course of arrests of OBVIOUS War Crimes would have the unique challenge to marshal strategy to use limited resources for the endgame result of removing War Criminals from power.
A way to help is for We the People to communicate demand for such arrests.
Conclusion: Either the public achieves intellectual integrity and moral courage sufficient to end OBVIOUS unlawful and lie-started wars, or else the history of empire/world wars/Cold War/Wars on Terror will continue in the dictatorial manner we’ve observed for all human history, and see now with Israel’s genocide upon Gaza.
- General definition; in this case, encyclopedic from a Supreme Court case in India.
note to readers: We who provide leading-edge research, documentation, and analysis merely request your own best self-expression. Do your best :)