...‘There are no just causes for war’ Many argue that there are just reasons for going to war however others state that there are no just reason at all, some reasons to go to war can be fighting for human rights or defending your religion however these can be overseen due to the amount of innocent people who die during war. A just reason for war may be to restore or protect human rights. Many people will claim or demand for better human rights and will want to oppose anyone who will go against them, this is a just reason for war as people are standing together and uniting as one to get what they want which is a better life. Augustine said that a just cause for going to war was ‘defending from attack’, if human rights were violated citizens may feel attacked and under threat therefore in order to restore peace they will have to go to war as they will see this as the only sensible response. The general rule is that only those people fighting you are legitimate targets of attack. Those who are not fighting should not be attacked as this would violate their human rights. Another just cause for going to war is self-defence; the clearest just cause is acting against an aggressor, for example in an invasion, many people are patriotic and would rather die instead of giving up their country to invaders therefore will start a war as a sense of self defence. Augustine said that a just cause for war was ‘recapturing things taken’; this view can be used here as invaders would be trying to...
Words: 648 - Pages: 3
...Abstract Operation Just Cause was the invasion of Panama by US Forces in December of 1989. The mission of the US was to protect US lives and property, keep the canal open, conduct non-combatant evacuation operations in peaceful or hostile environments, and to develop and assist any government that would take over the current dictatorship that is in place. The operations were strategically formed to minimize casualties and damage to the local infrastructure by considering the operational environment. The accomplishment of the mission required US forces to contemplate on different tactics we were not accustomed to fighting. “Operation Just Cause represented a bold new era in American military force projection for speed, mass, and precision coupled...
Words: 1758 - Pages: 8
...Running header: Just War Theory The Just War Theory Regarding the War on Terrorism Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University Abstract The modern interpretation of the Just War Theory list seven conditions which must met in order for a war to be considered “Just” (jus ad bellum). This paper demonstrates that, while it has been suggested that all wars, even the current war on terrorism, are unjust, the facts remain that any war that meets each of the seven criteria is a just war, regardless of opinion. Throughout the ages man has always looked to bring about the end of war, or when war has been waged to minimize the destruction caused when nations war. According to the text;”these rules were worked out in the late Middle Ages by the so-called Schoolmen or Scholars, building on the Roman law and early Christian thinkers such as Augustine and Ambrose. (The Moral of the Story, 2006) These rules were developed to first, deter wars, but when determined necessary, to limit the scope and suffering from the war. While not completely universal in scope, most advanced western societies have embraced the theory of just war as a bases for determining when, and if, a war is justified. As set forth by the Schoolmen, there are seven criteria that must be considered and met before nations can engage in war. They are; the Last Resort, a Just Cause, a Legitimate, Competent Authority, Comparative Justice, Right Intention, Probability of Success...
Words: 2037 - Pages: 9
...In this essay I will argue that the ‘war on terror’ declared by the Bush administration and so assessed for the US; is not a just war. It fails in the central interrelated criteria of just cause and last resort for jus ad bellum, which I detail first through assessment of the Bush administration’s self-proclaimed just reasoning behind resorting to war against a concept, and the alternatives available to it, I will then detail its failure in the jus in bello criteria of discrimination and proportionality, reasoning through the case of drone warfare. Jus ad bellum I shall firstly focus on the crucial jus ad bellum principle of just cause, holding the only just cause for war to be self-defence . The USA and its allies suffered unjust, unprovoked terror attacks, notably to embassies and battleships, as well as ultimately the 9/11 disaster, and further possessed reputable evidence of other failed attacks. Thus this essay acknowledges that they were under-attack from a powerful and effective enemy, which could be reliably pinpointed as Al Qaeda. These attacks were focused on non-combatants in landmark locations; deliberate targeting for maximum terror spreading effect, which further represented an attack on western freedoms. Hence the assailant satisfied neither jus ad bellum, nor jus in bello, and without immediate and effective action there existed great potential for further unjust attacks. This was the Bush administration’s argument for sufficient reason to declare war in self-defence...
Words: 2219 - Pages: 9
...Just War theory is a doctrine, also referred to as a tradition, of military ethics studied by theologians, ethicists, policy makers and military leaders. The purpose of the doctrine is to ensure war is morally justifiable through a series of criteria, all of which must be met for a war to be considered just. The criteria are split into two groups: ‘the right to go to war’ and ‘right conduct in war’ . The first concerns the morality of going to war and the second with moral conduct within war. Recently there have been calls for the inclusion of a third category of just war theory - jus post bellum - dealing with the morality of post-war settlement and reconstruction. Just War theory postulates that war, while very terrible, is not always the worst option. There may be responsibilities so important, atrocities which can be prevented or outcomes so undesirable they justify war. Origins The Indian epic, the Mahabharata, offers one of the first written discussions of a 'just war'. In it, one of five ruling brothers asks if the suffering caused by war can ever be justified, and then a long discussion ensues between the siblings, establishing criteria like proportionality, just means, just cause, and fair treatment of captives and the wounded. The war in Mahabharata is preceded by context that develops the "just cause" for the war including last minute efforts to reconcile differences to avoid war. At the beginning of the war, there is the discussion of "just conduct" appropriate...
Words: 1514 - Pages: 7
...occasions. The Just war theory deals with the justification of how and why wars are fought. The justification can be theoretical. The theoretical aspect is concerned with justifying war ethically. The role of ethics is used to examine whether war is justified and if so can the aspects be changed. The just war tradition also considers the thoughts of various philosophers through the ages and examine their philosophical visions of war’s ethical limits and whether their thoughts have contributed to the justification of war. The just war theory was firstly developed by Saint Augustine of Hippo. Looking back at the Bible he realised that although older generations sided with the more peaceful aspects of the Bible (New Testament) the aspects which included violence (Old Testament) could not be ignored. In Mathew 5 it Jesus said “blessed are the peacemakers” however he did not oppose those who crucified him. This links to how war can be justified because Jesus Gods only son did not punish those who purposely killed him without reason. So to punish those with to an extent have a valid reason could be seen as hypocritical. Augustine believed that justified wars were commanded by God in the bible and split his theory into two parts they are; jus ad bellum-just reasons for going to war, and jus in bello-just practice in war. This was then further developed by Aquinas. Jus ad bellum contains seven key points. If these points are met then war can be justified. The points are; just authority-war...
Words: 1501 - Pages: 7
...Bellum iustum or the Just War Theory is a military ethics doctrine derived from Episcopal philosophy of the Roman Catholic Church. As studied today, the Just War Theory is considered hugely informed by the Christian understanding of the justifications of wars of invasion. In ethicist literature as in moral theology and policy making, the Just War Theory is associated with the belief that conflicts can be justified under certain philosophical, political and religious criteria. This paradigm dates back to the times of Marcus Tullius Cicero, a Roman statesman, philosopher, lawyer, theorist and constitutionalist. The connection of the theory to medieval Christian theory and particularly, contemporary Catholicism is in the works of Thomas Aquinas and Aurelius Augustinus Hipponensis (Gutman & Rieff, 2000). The former, also called Thomas of Aquin was an Italian Dominican priest, a theologian and a philosopher. The latter, also called St. Augustine, Blessed Augustine or Augustine of Hippo, was a onetime Bishop of Hippo Regius, a philosopher and theologian. This paper describes the tenets of the just war theory derived from the works of these philosophers and the utility of the theory within contemporary warfare. Specific focus is on the justification of the US invasion of Iraq and the consequences thereof. In the works of these three philosophers, the Just War Theory took a Christian connotation of the Roman Empire’s view of warfare. The Christian understanding of provocation to war...
Words: 979 - Pages: 4
...edu/ethics/publications/ethicalperspectives/cook.html> The author of this essay, Dr. Martin L. Cook, is an Elihu Root Professor of Military Science and a Professor of Ethics under the Department of Command, Leadership and Management at the U.S. Army War College. Under the guidance of the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, Operations, U.S. Army, Cook was asked to prepare this paper. Prior to his current position, Cook engaged his professional expertise at the Santa Clara University and taught under in the Department of Religious Studies. Cook’s paper first states that as a result of the recent September 11th, 2001 attacks pertaining to the Pentagon (Washington D.C) and the World Trade Center (New York City), the concept of just warfare - the moral and legal traditions of just war and its appropriate, yet effective response has vastly differed and have been challenged. Not only are they subjective to interstate war, but are also adapted to the war against...
Words: 1410 - Pages: 6
...thinking of a war and the violence that comes along with it, it seems as though all measures should be taken to prevent such a tragic resolution. When those measures are not successful, or an attack is made on an opposing country, war is usually inevitable, especially when there is terrorism involved. The question arises: Is war on terrorism ethical and just? Using the utilitarian and deontologist theories, I will demonstrate how war on terrorism is in fact justified. Utilitarianism is the theory that the consequences of an action determine the morality of the act; it is also focused on an outcome that appeases the majority (Mosser, 2013). For example, if my children both like pepperoni only on their pizza, and we are a family of three, it would make the most sense to order a pepperoni pizza rather than a deluxe since the pepperoni appeases both children. Since utility is based on consequences, this scenario works because while I enjoy deluxe pizza and it would please me, my children are the majority and pepperoni isn’t bad at all. When applying this ethical theory to the topic of war on terrorism, Americans can be considered just in fighting the war because the vast majority of Americans can agree that terrorism must be stopped. The definition of terrorism in itself, which is the use of violence to intimidate or coerce, goes against morality and would only be in the best interest of the group that enacts the terror. While most people can agree that torture is not an ethical act...
Words: 849 - Pages: 4
...terrorism, the engagement of war, cultural and ethnic conflicts. This course will explore why we wage war, the development of terrorism and its impact on societies, society’s quest for peace and the methods attempted to achieve peace. This course will also explore the concept of human rights and how terrorism and war impact these rights. © Copyright Fontbonne University, St. Louis, MO, January 2007. COURSE OVERVIEW TOPICS • Historic and philosophical positions on war • Contemporary moral foundations on war • Human rights • Terrorism • Humanitarian intervention and preemptive war • Religious positions on war • Toward a theory of just peace COURSE OVERVIEW INTRODUCTORY NOTES TO FACULTY The subjects of war, peace, terrorism and human rights are daily fare in the media. While people form strong opinions on these matters and tend to regard them as right or wrong, many do not have the skills to analyze and clearly articulate a rationale for their positions. The purpose of this course is thus twofold: to equip students with the ethical theories needed to make a judgment concerning the morality of a particular action or conflict and to examine these actions and conflicts in a rational and objective manner. The four major components, each of which counts equally toward the evaluation of the student: Class attendance and participation in activities 10% ...
Words: 2915 - Pages: 12
...Morgan Valone Theology May 6, 2012 B1 The Kingdom of God The Kingdom of God was the focus of Jesus’ mission and ministry, and what he lived and died for on Earth. The Kingdom of God can be defined as the vision of a world radically transformed in the image of God. The ideal Kingdom on Earth would be people all living free of government and politics and living in a communal style. In the Apostolic Ages, this type of communal living was attempted with the householders and itinerant preachers. The householders were people who would open their homes to the itinerants, who were travelling preachers. These travelling preachers taught “The Way” of Jesus and a new way of living to many communities. While this went well for a while, it was not perfect to the way that Jesus would have wanted it to be. During the Common Meal in the communal societies, the wealthy people would eat more than they needed to. This alone demonstrates the fact that not only were the wealthy taking more than they needed and not living by only what they needed and sharing the rest, but it also shows that there were in fact wealthy people in the communes. Jesus was in direct opposition to the idea of wealth, and the intentions of having a commune were that when a person joined, all of their money and possessions were to be shared equally throughout the entire community. Even in the times directly following Jesus’s life, the Kingdom of God was not being lived ideally. Throughout the Middle Ages, Christianity...
Words: 2982 - Pages: 12
...Amongst global issues there are so many widely debated concerns, and war being one of which is the most popular. The just war theory will forever be atop the list of global issues. The question of it being right or wrong depends on the person. Me being in the Airforce, I personally think it is needed. Dating back to the revolutionary war: war has helped us become the great nation that we are today. Although deemed tragic with lives being lost, the acceptance of war within certain moral and ethical boundaries, can be justified, has been necessary, and will continue to be so as long as humans are capable of a greater evil. If asked “what should I do?” I believe that as a nation we should all be able to live the life we want to live, as long as you’re a law abiding citizen. Being able to live out that fulfillment of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is something we fight for every day. The just war theory was put in place by philosophers such as Plato but later on added to by people such as Christian monk, and Thomas Aquinas. The purpose of the theory is to provide a framework as to what is the right way to act in a potential conflict situation. For me Plato’s mind frame of thinking relates to different theories such as Contractarianism and Utilitarianism. Fighting against others foreign and domestic is an attest to strategies for attending to our liberty, which falls under Contractarianism. By doing so I think we are better off as a nation knowing that we will always...
Words: 856 - Pages: 4
...War is a tricky subject, and in this case after the attacks from ISIS on our embassy’s, after the attacks on American civilians, we still cannot go to war according to Just War Theory and our moral values, as badly as the American people may want to go to war, we cannot and must not engage ISIS militarily with a full standing army, we have to punish them in other ways. Just War Theory is conducted in three parts, the initiation of war, known as jus ad bellum, the conducting of the war itself, jus in bello, and finally the aftermath of war, known as, jus post bellum (Moser and McDonald, 2016a). Jus ad bellum is the initiation of war and it states that war must have a just cause and that war must be taken by a legitimate authority, and in this situation, both of the characteristics mentioned previously are present. Yes, we have a just cause, and yes, the United States is a legitimate authority. However, we need to look at everything about jus ad bellum, “armed conflict is taken as a ‘“last resort’” and all other means have been exhausted.” Let us not forget that “a just war requires a “‘right intention”’ and to not be motivated by aggression” (Moser and McDonald, 2016a). In this situation, the American...
Words: 1040 - Pages: 5
...U.S. Marines direct a concentration of fire at the enemy, Vietnam, 8 May 1968 Issue indivisibility occurs when the two parties cannot avoid war by bargaining because the thing over which they are fighting cannot be shared between them, only owned entirely by one side or the other. Religious issues, such as control over the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, are more likely to be indivisible than economic issues. A bigger branch of the theory, advanced by scholars of international relations such as Geoffrey Blainey, is that both sides decide to go to war and one side may have miscalculated. Some go further and say that there is a problem of information asymmetry with incentives to misrepresent. The two countries may not agree on who would win a war between them, or whether victory would be overwhelming or merely eked out, because each side has military secrets about its own capabilities. They will not avoid the bargaining failure by sharing their secrets, since they cannot trust each other not to lie and exaggerate their strength to extract more concessions. For example, Sweden made efforts to deceive Nazi Germany that it would resist an attack fiercely, partly by playing on the myth of Aryan superiority and by making sure that Hermann Göring only saw elite troops in action, often dressed up as regular soldiers, when he came to visit. The American decision to enter the Vietnam War was made with the full knowledge that the communist forces would resist them, but did not believe that...
Words: 1486 - Pages: 6
...Just and Unjust Wars Do people ever fight unjust wars? I believe people do fight unjust wars. An unjust war is when one group tries to take over another group. This can be because of power, religious beliefs, economic gain, etc. The online definition I found for unjust war is “any conflict in which one party will attempt to enforce dominance on a different party. This may be carried out for a number of reasons like power, economic gain, religious differences and ethnic cleansing. Theory of unjust war is contrasted with just war theory” (ask.com). An unjust war is fought with the wrong intentions. If a group hasn’t tried all non-violent options to solve their issue, then I feel that the war they engage in is unjust. A good example of an unjust war is the war that is going on in Iraq. This war has been going on for over eleven years now. During this time span there have been no real answers to what we have accomplished, but yet our soldiers are still dying along with Iraqi civilians. In addition to the lives lost, our economy is horrible with a big impact being from oil and gas prices. Even though immense fighting still exists, our troops need to start leaving Iraq. How long must we continue to fight a war that seems to be leading us nowhere? Also, ever since the beginning of the human race, there has been war. One group feels that they can take over another group and not only take over their land, but also use their resources and people for their own profit...
Words: 520 - Pages: 3
