From a netfriend:

There has been a suggestion that it would be better to change the agenda of the Walk Against the War to one where we say we would support the war if it were UN backed. The suggestion that peace marchers are part of the problem is absurd. It was the USA and the UK governments that supported Saddam Hussein for years, and provided him with both political status and weapons. Now, supposedly to topple him, they want to bomb and invade a nation where half the population are children and most of them are malnourished. That is not a moral proposal. It is opportunism – using the problems of Iraq to justify their political agenda. The Uniting Church cannot say we will back a war if the UN authorises it, because 1. It would be contrary to the UN charter to authorise a war unless there is actual present aggression against other nations or there is imminent threat of aggression – see chapter 7 of the UN charter. Saddam Hussein flouting UN resolutions is not enough to justify a war – lots of nations have flouted the UN at various times, including Israel. 2. The Security Council is not intended to act as a court. The point of having an International Criminal Court is so that people like Saddam Hussein are prosecuted under International Law by a proper process (the USA cannot advocate this approach as they refuse to ratify the court). A court would require proper evidence, rather than the vague material that Colin Powell has put to the Security Council. The court came into existence in July 2002. If the USA wants to topple Saddam Hussein, it should ratify the court, and refer its allegations about Saddam Hussein to the court for investigation and prosecution. Saddam Hussein might not cooperate, but a proper investigation can still take place, with Saddam Hussein then required to present himself to the court to answer the charges – if he does not appear, he becomes a fugitive from the court. What happens then ? That will have to be worked out at the time, but at least the court provides a better process than prosecution and execution both by George Bush and advisers. 3. The churches oppose war. We believe that war is not the path to peace. The point of the just war theory is to say that war should only ever be used in the face of actual aggression, and to the minimal extent necessary to stop that aggression. From a Christian perspective, war is never the way to peace. That is why the churches supported the setting up of the United Nations. 4. The churches should have at least as much faith in the possibilities for non-violent solutions as the many community groups who support the Walk Against the War: no war on Iraq, no Australian involvement. After all, we believe that Christ is bringing the whole world into unity, and that God works with those who work for peace. 5 We need to remember that the USA is not a genuine supporter of the UN. It withheld its contributions for years, thus hamstringing the UN. It only discovered the UN as a useful instrument on September 11. And now it is manipulating the Security Council with offers of aid to particular countries, and is bullying it publicly. It is not asking the UN Security Council to develop a plan and appoint the commanders. The USA has made it clear that it intends to wage this war in its own way, not as the subordinate of the UN. 6. When Australian troops went into East Timor, it was to protect the East Timorese against Indonesian backed militia and it did not involve the sort of all out war that the USA has stated publicly it will wage against Iraq. Its primary focus was to protect civilians. The Australian military is a defence force. The USA military is an offensive (in every sense of the term)

force. They think differently. 7.Australia should not participate in a war where its troops need to be given permission to disobey the orders of the commanders of the nation in charge of the war, ie the USA, if the USA requires them to act contrary to Australia’s understanding of international law with respect to civilians. It has already been announced publicly that that Australian troops have been given this permission. The USA does not pay proper attention to the need to avoid civilian casualties. Whatever our own troops do, by supporting the war we as a nation are an accessory to any USA caused civilian deaths.

Related Reading: