Trump, Venezuela and the “War on Drugs”

Let’s speak clearly. The United States does have a drug problem! Provisional data from the CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics indicate there were an estimated 80,391 drug overdose deaths in the United States during 2024. By far, the deadliest drug is fentanyl, which annually causes over 70,000 overdose deaths. Nevertheless, it is not Venezuela that moves fentanyl into the U.S. It is China via drug cartels located in Mexico.

The deadliest drug that comes into the United States from South America is not fentanyl. It is cocaine, made from the coca plant. Venezuela does not grow much coca. The biggest growers of coca and the countries that export the most cocaine to the U.S. are Colombia, Peru and Bolivia.

From September until the present, the Trump administration, via the Secretary of Defense Hegseth, has struck more than twenty small boats in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific, killing over 80 civilians. The government has alleged that these boats were smuggling drugs into the United States, but have not provided an ounce of proof. It is highly unlikely these boats were smuggling drugs into the U.S. for a variety of reasons: Venezuela exports oil, not drugs; a drug smuggler would fill up the limited space in his small boat with drugs, not passengers; no drugs have been retrieved from the crippled boats; and the survivors from the September 2 strike were struck and killed in a second strike, rather than provide eyewitness account of the purpose of their boat’s cargo.

Just yesterday, the U.S. military seized a large Venezuelan oil tanker and has maintained possession of it. When asked by reporters what would happen to the oil, President Trump said, “We would keep it.” These actions ordered by the Pentagon are clearly military actions of warfare. According to the U.S. Constitution, unless there is an actual attack on the United States, only Congress can declare war. We are not at war with Venezuela. Therefore, the strikes against these small boats, including the death of more than 80 civilians, and the seizure of the tanker, were definitely illegal and probably acts of murder. If the Pentagon has valid evidence, it should make its case to Congress…immediately. In addition, the U.S. should take its case to the United Nations Security Council because these military actions have taken place in international waters.

So why are Trump and Hegseth making up bogus claims of alleged drug shipments from Venezuela? Probably to distract us from real issues like inflation and health insurance prices.

This is an ethical and legal test for our current administration and our Secretary of Defense. Will they pass the test? I doubt it.

The Smithsonian Museums and a Necessary Debate about Our National Sins: We Need to Face our Painful Past

An important debate is swirling around our country. It was triggered by President Trump, but the controversy goes back thousands of years. It is a debate about human nature and ethics, about good and evil, and about what we should do if, whether individually or collectively, we have committed evil.

People and cultures influenced by the three great monotheistic religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) ground their moral code in the nature of God. According to these faiths, humans are special beings created in God’s image, able to choose between good and evil. Most adherents of other religions, as well as agnostics and atheists, also have a sense of right and wrong. Traditionally, committing an evil act was called a sin, but that word is not so common today. It is not just a change of words, but also how we view ourselves and our actions. Back in 1973, a psychiatrist, Karl Menninger wrote a book called Whatever Became of Sin?, in which he argued that our modern world was shifting away from the concept of sin. It was being replaced with terms like illness, dysfunction, or mental disorder. He suggested that this shift would result in a gradual reduction in accountability for our actions. Behaviors previously considered as sinful would now be excused as normal consequences of our biochemistry (nature) or our environment (nurture).

This lack of accountability now permeates our society. We either blame others for our errors, or we reclassify past sins as now morally neutral or necessary. This is a re-writing of history and is taking place today right before our eyes. An important example of this took place last Tuesday. President Trump ordered his lawyers to conduct a review of the Smithsonian museums because their description of the history of the United States was too negative, and they focused too much on “how bad Slavery was”. He continued, “The Smithsonian is OUT OF CONTROL, where everything discussed is how horrible our Country is, how bad Slavery was, and how unaccomplished the downtrodden have been — Nothing about Success, nothing about Brightness, nothing about the Future,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

This is Trump’s rewriting of his own description of the Smithsonian portrayal of U.S. history. Trump had previously praised the Smithsonian museums, including the National Museum of African American History and Culture, which he toured during his first term as president. “I’m deeply proud that we now have a museum that honors the millions of African American men and women who built our national heritage, especially when it comes to faith, culture and the unbreakable American spirit,” Trump said during remarks at the museum in February 2017. Later that month, Trump said the museum “tells of the great struggle for freedom and equality that prevailed against the sins of slavery and the injustice of discrimination.”

Why did Trump make this complete about face? Here are some possible reasons:

Trump wants to distract the U.S. people from paying too much attention to the Epstein files.
Trump wants to deflect criticism of his failed diplomacy attempts to bring peace to Ukraine. Putin has yet to make any concessions (such as a temporary ceasefire) and the Russian leader is slow-walking bilateral or trilateral peace talks. Is Putin playing him again?
Trump wants to draw attention away from the rate of inflation that is starting to rise due to his tariffs.

Whatever his motivations, Trump is not alone in minimizing national sins and exaggerating national virtues. Rulers from long ago (Egyptian Pharaohs and Roman Emperors) and in more recent times (Hitler, Putin) have appealed to a cheap “patriotism” in attempts to justify their evil actions. The British claimed their imperial expansion was “beneficial” for their colonies. George Washington and other Revolutionaries saw through the hypocrisy of these claims. Prior to the U.S. war with Mexico (1846-1848), Illinois congressman Abraham Lincoln brought legislation before the House of Representatives which denounced President Polk for taking our country into an immoral, imperialistic war against our neighbor to the south. Evidence demonstrated Lincoln was right, but the citizens of his district did not re-elect him to his House seat.

Jesus warned about rulers who cover up their evil deeds and falsely claim they are seeking the well-being of their subjects. “The kings of this world lord it over their subjects; yet want the people to address them as ‘Doers of Good’ (=Benefactors). But you are not to be like that. Instead, the greatest among you should be like the youngest, and the one who rules like the one who serves.” (Luke 22:25-26)

It is not just rulers who deny their own evil deeds. It is quite common for most of us to ignore or minimize our sins, whether they be personal or national. Almost two thousand years ago, the Apostle John wrote, “If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us.” John continues with the remedy, “But if we confess our sins, God is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” (I John 1:9-10) Justice requires that we seek reconciliation with those we have damaged and that we pay compensation that is appropriate.

Some of us are sensitive to “individualistic” sins, like drunkenness or sexual infidelity, but are not nearly as attuned to social or national sins. Nevertheless, religious Scriptures deal with both individual and national sin. For example, the prophet Amos denounced the national/social atrocities of Israel’s neighbors. The Syrians, the Phoenicians, the Ammonites, the Moabites, and others were guilty of slavery, expansionist warfare, and the oppression of foreigners. The just God would bring judgment upon those who committed such evil acts. You can almost hear the Jews cheering as Amos railed against his nation’s neighbors and enemies and announced their impending judgment. But being God’s “chosen people” did NOT mean that Israel was guiltless. If anything, it means the Jewish people are probably more accountable for their actions because they have received more of God’s revelation. Therefore, Amos turns his attention to Israel and Judah. (Amos 2:4-16) He denounces their idolatry, their oppression of women via prostitution, their corruption, and their cruel mistreatment of the poor. Yes, social sin is real, and can be just as bad as individual evil… or worse. Yes, slavery in our country was truly atrocious and evil. If many of the slaveowners were “Christians”, their faith did not sanctify their actions. It merely added “hypocrisy” to their list of sins. The supposed “exceptionalism” of the United States does not justify nor sanctify our national sins.

Of course, I was not alive during the time of U.S. slavery. It ended nine decades before I was born. Nevertheless, some of my ancestors were slaveowners. Some of the inheritance I received (property, money, education) was due to the sinful exploitation of slaves. What should I do to make restitution? I’m just beginning to take some small steps.

Just as it is impossible to overemphasize the horrors of the Holocaust, I believe it also impossible to give too much importance to the horrific sins committed in our national slavery. Slaves were beaten and killed. Families were separated. In most cases, slaves were not allowed to learn how to read or write, nor to get married, nor to own property, nor to vote. The Christian faith they heard was heavy on “Slaves, obey your masters” and weak on “You shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free”.

The presidential order quoted at the beginning of this post criticized the Smithsonian for showing “how unaccomplished the downtrodden have been”. This is the epitome of hypocrisy. I, and many of my fellow citizens, celebrate the resilience of those who endured slavery, and we are deeply impressed by the great accomplishments of Black Americans in all fields of endeavor. Two examples are the Tuskegee Airmen and Jackie Robinson of baseball fame. Nevertheless, Trump has previously ordered the removal of these two outstanding examples from governmental agencies because they are “bad” expressions of DEI. Mr. Trump, you can’t have it both ways. You can’t criticize the Smithsonian for omitting great black achievements and also order the removal of these examples from government agencies. Your blatant hypocrisy is damaging the moral education of our nation’s children.

Esteemed readers, do we know who we are and where we are going? An article in the Smithsonian Magazine tells us part of the purpose of its National Museum of African American History and Culture. “It was to help a nation understand itself — an impossible task without the full recognition of the horrors of slavery.” Some truths are quite painful, but they are necessary for our own self-understanding. If we learn from these painful truths, instead of trying to bury them, we are on the path of growing up.

Grading Trump on His Performance in the Summit: Using His Own Criteria, He did not Pass the Test

I give President Trump credit for organizing and attending the summit with “president” Putin. But giving Trump a grade on his performance at the summit, Trump failed the test.

Here are the criteria that Trump himself provided for evaluating the summit.

When the Putin-Trump meeting was first announced, it was hailed as a major breakthrough. Nevertheless, in the days leading up to their talk, the White House lowered expectations. A three-hour meeting in Alaska would not immediately end the war in Ukraine, but it would be considered a “success”, if Trump could arrange a “second meeting” in which he would moderate and Putin and Zelensky would settle their differences. No such “second meeting” has been announced nor appears on the horizon, but Zelensky is scheduled to come to the White House on Monday. Hope springs eternal?
This week Trump did affirm to Bret Baier of Fox News that, at the very least, a successful summit would result in a ceasefire. No ceasefire has been announced…yet.
Trump said there would be a joint press conference in which he and Putin would field questions from the international press. The press gathering lasted only 12 minutes, no questions were allowed, and the session was abruptly ended. Putin then turned the tables on Trump by giving him an invitation to meet the next time in Moscow.
Although Trump said they had a very productive meeting, no specifics were provided. Later, he conceded, “we haven’t gotten there”.
Even Trump’s supporters were disappointed in his performance. Fox News Senior White House Correspondent Jacqui Heinrich offered a brutal, eye-witness assessment of the awkward and confusing joint press conference fiasco. “We were told we would have an opportunity to put questions to both leaders after a joint press conference in the event the meeting went well enough that they could set the stage for a second meeting, And President Trump said if that didn’t happen, he was likely to call off the joint presser and just address the media solo and send people home. Neither of those things happened. And what was really stunning to me as someone who has been in a lot of these press conferences was a few things that were very unusual,” she said. “You had Putin come out and address the press first. We are on U.S. soil here. And that left the media scrambling to get their headsets in. Usually, it is the leader of the country — the host country of a summit that speaks first and addresses. Putin started off in Russian. And we all had to get our heads set on and listen to him rattle off the diatribe about the history of the U.S. and Russia. The way that it felt in the room was not good,” she reported. “It did not seem like things went well, and it seemed like Putin came in and steamrolled, got right into what he wanted to say. And got his photo next to the president and then left. Of course, that is only the piece of the picture that we have right now, and certainly President Trump, who is the host and who is, the president, would not want to, I think, enable something that would make him look weak.” Contrast her analysis with Trump’s grading himself as a perfect 10.
Putin did not make any concessions. Is he still “playing” Trump, by pretending to be open to peace negotiations, but not willing to follow through? James Stavridis, former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, called Putin’s handling of our president a “rope a dope” experience.

Although Trump did not pass this mid-term exam, he has not totally failed the course. If he studies harder and works on his negotiating skills (such as using economic pressure to force Putin to make concessions), he can still get a passing grade. In fact, if he brokers a deal between Putin and Zelensky that Ukraine finds acceptable, I might even consider supporting his desire of winning the Nobel Peace Prize.

I Applaud President Trump for (Finally) Waking Up and Seeing the Evil of Putin

During his first term, Donald Trump and Russian “President” Vladimir Putin had a relationship of mutual praise. Trump admired Putin for being a “strong leader”. Trump justified Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, by asserting that Biden’s weakness had, in effect, “invited” Putin to invade. Trump lamented the loss of life in the war in Ukraine and campaigned that he would end the war on “Day One” by bringing Putin to negotiations. Regarding Putin, Trump affirmed five months ago, “I believe he wants peace, I mean, I know him very well. Yeah, I think he wants peace.… I trust him on this subject.”

Even though Trump’s envoys favored Russia in the preliminary peace talks and Trump humiliated Ukraine’s President Zelensky in their White House meeting, Putin didn’t cooperate in good faith. Although Putin said he wanted peace, what he really wanted was to take over control of all of Ukraine. In an unguarded moment, Trump admitted he was getting “played” by Putin. Something significantly changed a few weeks ago. Trump started to wake up. He began to see Putin for who he really was: a murdering tyrant and an aggressor. In a press conference, Trump was asked a question by a female reporter. Noting her accent, he asked her where she was from. She replied, “Ukraine”. She added that her husband was still in their home country. Remarkably, Trump seemed to show sincere empathy for her situation. He began to perceive the tragic reality about Putin that many saw a decade ago. Did Marco Rubio whisper the truth into his ear? Maybe.

After days of expressing anger with his latest phone call with Putin, Trump erupted at a Cabinet meeting on Tuesday. He said, “We get a lot of bullsh*t thrown at us by Putin, if you want to know the truth. He’s very nice all of the time, but it turns out to be meaningless.” There’s a bill going through the Senate that would apply economic sanctions on Russia that has the overwhelming support of Republicans and Democrats. The president seems to like the bill as long as it doesn’t tie his hands.

Where should we put the emphasis? That Trump woke up to the truth regarding the evil of Putin OR that it took him so long to wake up? I am just glad that he seems to be awake now. Perhaps we are a bit closer to peace in Ukraine. PS. On Monday, Trump will give a major address on Russia.

The War in Ukraine: A Bit of Hope, but is Trump Getting “Played” by Putin?

Yesterday, U.S. President Trump and Russian “President” Putin had a lengthy (roughly two hours) phone conversation with the goal of ending the war in Ukraine. I do not fault Trump with reaching out to an authoritarian world leader who is guilty of war crimes (according to the International Criminal Court). I do raise concerns about Russia taking advantage of Trump’s lack of leverage in these negotiations. These conversations already have a history, including Trump’s meeting with Ukrainian President Zelensky in the White House and talks between Russian and U.S. envoys. In these preliminaries, Trump has made several unnecessary and unhelpful concessions to Putin:

Trump falsely accused Zelensky of starting the war and Trump defended Putin against charges of being the aggressor (in the UN vote)
Trump affirmed that Russia would be awarded some land in eastern Ukraine
Ukraine would not be allowed to join NATO

By giving up these concessions up front, the United States has lost its leverage in these talks.

The Good News: Yesterday, Putin agreed to a 30-day limited cease-fire in which Russia would stop strikes on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure as long as Ukraine did the same. Putin also agreed to a significant prisoner exchange for later this month.

The Bad News: Putin did NOT agree to a complete 30-day cease-fire. To advance the negotiations, the U.S. cannot provide additional military assistance or intelligence information to Ukraine. Ukraine cannot send more troops to the front. These and other demands are totally unacceptable to Ukraine (and to our European allies).

The Results: Putin gives the impression that he is open and eager to end the war. In fact, he is stalling. Every day the war continues, Russia takes more territory. Trump’s peace initiatives will not be successful, because Putin is not acting in good faith. It sure looks like Trump, the author of “The Art of the Deal”, is getting “played” by Putin.

What can Trump do? He must regain leverage over Putin. He should impose new financial sanctions on Russia. These sanctions can be used as “bargaining chips” which can later be withdrawn if Putin removes his unreasonable demands.

The War in Ukraine: A Bit of Hope, but is Trump Getting “Played” by Putin?

Trump falsely accused Zelensky of starting the war and Trump defended Putin against charges of being the aggressor (by siding with Russian, North Korea, etc. in the UN vote)
Trump affirmed that Russia would be awarded some land in eastern Ukraine
Ukraine would not be allowed to join NATO

By giving these concessions up front, the United States has lost its leverage in these talks.

Trump’s Plan to End the War in Ukraine: Concessions and Non-negotiables

On the campaign trail, Trump promised that he would end the war in Ukraine BEFORE he took office on January 20. Of course, no sane person believed that promise and of course, Trump did not fulfill his pledge. Nevertheless, Trump does deserve some credit for attempting to end the war. Last night, Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff met with Russian “president” Putin in a preliminary meeting to suggest a temporary ceasefire. It is in everyone’s interest (Ukraine, Russia, United States, Europe) for this war to end and a “just peace” to emerge in which both Ukraine and Russia are in agreement with the terms.

This will not be easy. A poll came out overnight in which 59% of Americans believe that a just peace is unlikely or very doubtful. Both countries have non-negotiables and both sides will have to make significant concessions. Here are the most important issues.

Territory integrity – I believe Ukraine is right in demanding territory integrity, that is, the boundaries be the same as prior to the war: Russian occupied lands in eastern Ukraine should be returned. Although Ukraine would also like Crimea to be returned, this wish list item might need to be sacrificed. One option is for the United Nations to study and vote on the status of Crimea some time in the intermediate future.

Membership in NATO – Ukraine wants to join NATO for its future security. Of course, Russia does not want an additional large, NATO member as its next-door neighbor for its own security reasons. Although desiring to join NATO is a legitimate goal, I would be willing to see this deferred for 5-10 years in order for a peace agreement to take place.

Putin’s Responsibility – It is obviously clear to sane people that Putin started this war. He was the aggressor. His reckless invasion has caused the deaths of many thousands of Ukrainian and Russian soldiers and civilians. Justice requires that Putin make some financial remuneration for the deaths that he caused and for the rebuilding of Ukraine. It is doubtful that Putin would admit any guilt. Tyrants seldom acknowledge any mistakes. (Trump knows this all too well.) My suggestion is that Europe and the United States magnanimously and jointly offer to pay for much of the rebuilding of Ukraine. This would be a more economical option than continuing to finance an unnecessary war.

Trump has chosen a difficult challenge: Bringing about a just peace. I hope he can achieve the “art of the deal”.

God Help Us When Trump Talks Religion

Yesterday, at the National Prayer Breakfast, President Trump ventured into the area of religion. This is not his strong suit. In fact, although he received many votes from evangelicals, he knows very little about the Christian message. The basic gospel message is that God so loved the world that he sent his only Son Jesus Christ to offer new life to people through the forgiveness of their sins. People need to repent (=turn from their sins) and confess their mistakes, and believe in Jesus. They are called to love God with their whole heart and to love their neighbors as themselves.

Trump himself has repeatedly admitted that he can’t remember ever asking God for forgiveness. Trump does not regret this partially because he says he doesn’t “have much to apologize for”. By his own words, he doesn’t know God’s forgiveness.

At the prayer breakfast the president quoted a verse from Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount: “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called the children of God” (Matthew 5:9). This is one of my favorite verses. In fact, I taught on this passage in an adult education class at my church this past Sunday. It is no secret that Trump wants to receive the Nobel Peace Prize. But quoting Scripture does not necessarily equate to following Scripture. Some of his harshest critics quoted the Hebrew Scriptures to Jesus. It is quite clear that it is more important to do God’s will than to merely quote a Biblical verse. Those who are true peacemakers are those who work to reduce hunger, poverty, and homelessness.

^“This is how we know what love is: Jesus Christ laid down his life for us. And we ought to lay down our lives for our brothers and sisters. If anyone has material possessions and sees a brother or sister in need but has no pity on them, how can the love of God be in that person? Dear children, let us not love with words or speech but with actions and in truth.” (I John 3:16-18)

It is painful to acknowledge that according to this passage, our president does not have the love of God in him. Not only does Trump show no pity (love) for those in need, he has increased their pain. Yesterday, it was announced that Trump (together with Elon Musk) is gutting USAID (reducing its employees from 5,000 to 290!). USAID has funded respected humanitarian organizations such as Meals on Wheels, World Relief, and Catholic Charities. Although it is appropriate for the administration to evaluate these organizations, IT IS NOT APPROPRIATE TO PAUSE FUNDING WHILE THE EVALUATION IS OCCURRING BECAUSE THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE WILL DIE. Homelessness, acute malnutrition, and malaria do not pause just because funds are on pause.

Let’s briefly turn our attention to the war in Gaza. The president’s comments on Gaza are not peacemaking. He has affirmed that we, the United States, will take over Gaza and occupy it, even if this means with U.S. soldiers. This will require expelling two million Palestinians from their homes in Gaza. We are called to love our neighbors as ourselves. Mr. President, would you want to be expelled from your home?

President Trump, your recent executive orders are not peacemaking. You are waging war against vulnerable people of the human race. The good news is that God still offers you forgiveness. I urge you to repent, change your evil ways, and ask to be forgiven.

Violence Begets More Violence

A week ago, Hamas viciously attacked Israel with missiles and ruthless kidnappings. This attack took the Israeli government by surprise, but Israel then responded by bombing Gaza. These mutual attacks have been bloody. Thousands of people have already been killed and more than a hundred people are being held hostage by Hamas. It is understandable that Israel wants to get revenge and they are poised to launch a massive ground assault in Gaza. Although this is understandable, it is also immoral and shortsighted. Their announced goal is to permanently rid Gaza of Hamas leadership. It is a flawed plan for the following reasons:

Hamas leaders are probably hidden away in underground tunnels throughout Gaza, making it difficult to capture or kill them. In this pursuit of Hamas leadership, a ground assault will become prolonged and will lead to the death of many Gazan civilians.
In addition, the Israeli government is cutting off food, water, and electricity to the 2.5 million civilians who live in Gaza. This is already producing a humanitarian crisis of gigantic proportions and the death of numerous innocent people.
Although Israel currently has the empathy and support of much of the world community, that will soon evaporate if large numbers of civilians lose their lives.
A ground assault will lead to the death of the hostages, not their liberation.
Neither the Israelis nor the United States have proposed a viable exit strategy. When will enough of the Hamas leadership be destroyed for Israel to claim victory? How many civilians will have died?

Positive actions do exist and should be pursued:

A ceasefire should be implemented immediately which would permit humanitarian aid to enter Gaza.
The U.S. should lean on Egypt to open their border crossing into Gaza to permit refugees to escape.
Neutral countries should step up to mediate and promote a long-lasting peace that would lead to the removal of Hamas leadership and would promote a two state solution and self-government for Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank.

Continued “justified” violence is not the answer. It would only lead to more senseless violence.

Memorial Day and our Unjust Wars: Let’s be Honest

This might not be a popular blog, but I submit it to your conscience. This past weekend, our country celebrated the national holiday of Memorial Day in which we honor those soldiers who gave their lives in our nation’s wars. Republicans and Democrats generally agree regarding the honoring of veterans, but both sides are failing the integrity test. Let me explain.

Our country, like most nations around the world, affirms that we practice Just War Theory (JWT). We claim that we will not go to war unless the basic four criteria of JWT are met (just cause, just intent, last resort, legitimate authorization). We also affirm that we will wage war according to JWT principles, like civilian immunity. What should we do when we fail to meet JWT conditions? An honest analysis shows that most of our wars have not been just. (See the book “The Wars of America: Christian Views”, edited by Ronald Wells, for such an analysis of each of our major wars). Our typical response is to slide down the slippery slope of excuses, alibis, or rationalizations. We avoid talking about our moral failures or we try to change the rules in midstream.

Let´s take the war in Iraq as an example. We spent twenty years, the lives of thousands of soldiers, over 100,000 civilian Iraqi deaths, and $1.7 trillion dollars for a war that was not justified. Allegedly, Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and had a close relationship with al-Qaeda. He was a terrible tyrant, but no weapons of mass destruction were ever found nor evidence of communication with al-Qaeda. The war was never authorized, neither by the U.S. Congress nor by the United Nations. The highly respected Secretary of State, General Colin Powell, made the case for war at the UN Security Council. The UN correctly did not approve the request, citing the lack of credible evidence. Being a man of integrity, General Powell later acknowledged his deep regret for having been used as an instrument to disseminate false information that led to a war with over 100,000 deaths, mostly civilians.

How should we remember unjust wars? Only a cheap, false patriotism would celebrate these wars. We would do well to learn from the ancient Israelites who confessed their sins on their annual Day of Atonement. We must learn to hold accountable our officials who gloss over their actions as “good intentions”. Good intentions are not enough. If Just War Theory is to be accepted as a valid national policy, we the people need to demand that our leaders do not take us into deadly wars that are not justified. My faith tradition teaches that if we deny our sins, we are liars and we deceive themselves. But if we confess our sins, we can find forgiveness. Unjust war involves the cheapening of human life. Our society has the highest gun violence in the world which points to a similar devaluing of lives. Let’s acknowledge our mistakes and find healing for our nation.

Further reading: “When War is Unjust” by John Howard Yoder and “Terrorism and the War in Iraq” that I wrote together with Rene Padilla.

A Potential War with Iran and the Attempt to get Reelected

It is well known that governments that are facing domestic problems often go to war in order to rally public support behind their failing administration. They hope that a majority of their citizens, in a spirit of nationalism, (not genuine patriotism), will overlook the domestic issues and come to the support of the executive branch of the government. This is what happened forty years ago when the failing government of Argentina went to war with England over the Falkland Islands.

In light of this political strategy, the following quote is illustrative:

“Our president will start a war with Iran because he has absolutely no ability to negotiate. He’s weak and he’s ineffective. So, the only way he figures that he’s going to get reelected — and as sure as you’re sitting there — is to start a war with Iran.”

Nevertheless, this quote did not come from a liberal Democrat in a critique against Donald Trump. It was not penned by left wing radicals who hate our current president. No, this was a tweet by Donald Trump on November 16, 2011 in which he predicted that then President Obama would lead our country into a senseless war in the Middle East. President Obama did not fulfill Trump’s prophecy. He refused to start a futile war with Iran for personal political gain. Although Trump was wrong about Obama, he was right about human nature and how many politicians make decisions. Many rulers create international crises for their own personal benefit. Ironically, perhaps Trump was predicting his own behavior in 2020.

Citizens in the United States, and around the world, must learn from history. The war in Iraq was touted as a “just” war that we waged to eliminate Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction. There were no weapons of mass destruction. Although Saddam Hussein was evil, our military conflict was not justified. Trump himself opposed that war and campaigned on getting our troops out of never ending, futile and unjust wars in the Middle East. He has just ordered the deployment of thousands of soldiers to the Middle East.

A truly biblical position on political activity comes from Jesus Himself where he warns people to not be naïve. Jesus told them, “The rulers of the world lord it over their subjects, and those who exercise authority over them call themselves Benefactors (= Doers of Good). Do not be like them.” (Luke 22:25-26). Jesus calls his followers not to believe everything we hear. We are called to have a healthy dose of skepticism. People must hold their elected officials responsible to tell the truth and to act justly. It is my hope and prayer that we do not fall into an “easy believism”. May we rigorously seek the truth and may the truth win out.