Oswald in the doorway: the blog of the Oswald Innocence Campaign, by Ralph Cinque

Starting a war is always a crime. There is never a valid reason to start one. Take World War 1, which was precipitated by the murder of the Archduke Ferdinand in Sarajevo. The war resulting from his death got 37 million people killed, which includes not only combat deaths and traumatic deaths to civilians, but also deaths from war-born diseases. 

But wait. World War 2 was really just a resumption of World
War 1 after a 20 year reprieve. Estimates of total deaths in World War 2 range from 70 to 85 million. So, we are looking at over 100 million people dead from both wars, and that is equual to the entire population of the United States at the time of World War 1. 

Of course, many have said that the killing of the Archduke was really just the pretext for the war, that powerful men, particularly from Britain, wanted war with Germany any way they could get it. 

And maybe they would have gotten it anyway.  But, once you start rewriting history, you really don't know; all bets are off. I'd like to think that World War 1 could have been avoided. 

And look at the parallels to 2001 when George W. Bush started a war over the acquisition of one man, Osama bin laden. Hundreds of thousands of Afghans have been killed in that war, as have over 2000 Americans.  The war rages on to this day. According to the Taliban, on May 19, 6 women and children were killed in Helmand province, and 10 more were wounded. 

In 2001, the Taliban offered to turn Osama bin laden over to a third country for trial, but that wasn't good enough for George W. Bush. He was determined to have a war.  But, why didn't he think about World War 1? Well, that's probably too much to ask, but why didn't someone in his staff point it out to him? - that if you start a war over one guy, you are going to get hundreds of thousands of innocent people killed. And in this case, there wasn't even an arrest warrant for bin laden, nor was there any evidence showing that he was responsible for 9/11. It wasn't until months later, during the fighting, that supposedly a video tape turned up at a remote house somewhere in Afghanistan showing OBL talking about planning 9/11. Except, it wasn't even bin laden; it was some fat guy.

The guy on the right is the bin laden from the tape, but by 2001, OBL was extremely sick with kidney failure, Marfan's syndrome, hepatitis, and diabetes, and he was wasting. There is no way that fat-faced guy was bin laden. And yet, that tape is the only evidence ever put forward that OBL was responsible for 9/11. 

Of course, you probably realize that I don't think bin laden was involved in 9/11. But, even if he was involved in 9/11, I still don't think it was justified to start a war. I will tell you very honestly that I don't think it is ever justified to start a war. 

And the amazing thing is that these bastards never learn. It's going on again right now with Trump, all the saber-rattling over Iran. Iran has never once said anything about wanting a war with the United States. What is the supposed justification for going to war with them? It's because the Ayatollahs who run Iran supposedly support terrorism. But, that charge is based entirely on the fact that Iran has  given money to Hamas and Hezbollah.  But, they are both LEGAL political parties in Gaza and Lebanon, and they both conduct vast social welfare programs, distributing food and medicine to the poor, and there are a lot of poor. That's what Iran says they contribute to. 

Iran would have to be insane to be involved in terrorism. That's because Iran depends on selling oil to the world, and they know that countries do not want to buy oil from terrorists. So, why would Iran support terrorism? What's in it for them? How could they be so stupid and so self-destructive? I don't think they are. I think Donald Trump is the one who is stupid, and John Bolton is just plain evil. He belongs in a straitjacket. To this day, he defends the decimation Iraq. "Saddam Hussein was a bad guy anyway (even without WMDs) and aren't the Iraqi people better off without him?" Well, not the dead Iraqi people, nor the loved ones of the dead Iraqi people either. Ask some Iraqi widow if she could have her dead husband back but have to put up with Saddam Hussein for a thousand years, and see what answer you get. But, the John Boltons of this world never think about what is precious to people like her. 

So, what is going to happen? I don't know. We have a mental midget in the White House who is being manipulated by people like Bolton and Pompeo. The U.S. media is as pro-war as ever. They aren't denouncing the war talk. 

The United States couldn't beat the Taliban in 18 years, and now we are pleading with them to negotiate with us. Do you have any idea how much stronger Iran is militarily then the Taliban? What would a war with Iran look like? No doubt it would start with Shock and Awe, but that would not be easy because unlike Iraq and Afghanistan, Iran has ample defenses to air attack, and they would use them. And, what would follow? A ground invasion of Iran? Oh My God... And here's the ultimate irony: just imagine if Trump was driven to use nuclear weapons against Iran? How did the United States, the only country to ever use nuclear weapons and to use them against civilian population centers, get to be the world's cop concerning nuclear weapons? 

I say that it is NEVER right to start a war, and it is never right to threaten to start a war. It is monstrous to even think about starting a war. War is the worst thing there is, and the worst thing there possibly could be, and it is never, ever justified to start a war. Anyone who starts a war is a frickin' monster.