Just War Theory (JWT) is, essentially, a theory of moral obligations of armies in wartime, and therefore rests upon the assumption that militaries and states are equivalent to moral agents. Because morality is a prescribed set of conduct governing the rules of individual…
However, two problems arise when trying to justify the use of JWT in shaping the United States and allies’ strategies in Afghanistan, where it is fighting an untraditional enemy that does not share the same kind of ethical ideals.
The first problem arises from the thought of each of two sides in the nontraditional war as moral agents, when one has clearly rejected the moral code the other follows. Since a moral code sets the ethical guidelines governing a community, when one party does not accept the moral code, the one that does accept the code is not obligated to follow that code. For instance, it is generally accepted that killing an animal that is known to be dangerous is ethical, insofar as doing so protects other members of the moral community from being harmed. Similarly, if a nontraditional army does not accept these rules of conduct, like the animal, it is well within the moral right of the traditional one to ensure its enemy does not harm another member of the moral community. From this assumption that militaries are moral agents, and the fact that moral codes provide the ethical guidelines for the community, an entity that does not accept the moral code is not obligated to ethical treatment according to this code. A war is nothing more than murder of other human beings; but instead of being punishable murder, it is sanctioned by states. JTW theory proposes the means by which one can create a more ethical war, but it does not address the issue of whether war itself is ethical.
This relatively conservative answer to whether JTW applies to a nontraditional war is supplemented by a second problem, which is tangentially addressed in “The Call to Arms”1. This issue has to deal with the source of JTW moral prescriptions, and whether a nontraditional fighting force like that seen in Afghanistan is to be dealt with ethical principles based on notions like “Christian love” or within the tradition ...
Cite this document
(“Just War Theory Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words - 1”, n.d.)
Retrieved from https://studentshare.net/miscellaneous/393288-just-war-theory
(Just War Theory Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 Words - 1)
“Just War Theory Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 Words - 1”, n.d. https://studentshare.net/miscellaneous/393288-just-war-theory.
This means that the military cannot live and operate in isolation but then should have all its operations in the interest of the nigger society. One issue of such importance to society about the work and operations of the military is Just War. Content According to the BBC Ethics Guide (2011), “A war is only just if it is fought for a reason that is justified, and that carries sufficient moral weight.” Just War goes beyond just a military practice to be encompassed as a theory.
Orend defines war as intentional, actual, and widespread-armed strife between antagonistic political communities. The war in the views of Orend does cover intercommunity, robbery or terrorism fights. However, many cases of war have been witnessed in many nations (a group of people sharing similar beliefs).
This paper aims to examine whether or not there is an existence of a just war. The Nature of War Regan (1996, p.3) stated that war was natural part of life during the Greek times, and that they intensify “self- interest.” “Right reason” was also said to be one of the “Moral Norm of War” (Regan, 1996, p.10).
It is widely agreed upon that a nuclear war, if it happens, would produce this result. The threat that stronger nations pose to the sovereignty of smaller nations is also one of the greatest problems that faces mankind at this point of time in history. For the purpose of acquiring resources and also for the age-old purpose of conversions, countries may turn loose aggression on countries that may be unable to defend themselves from such an onslaught.
Theories relating to just war have always tried distinguish between the right and wrong in these power games. The terminological conclusions of this distinction are the terms ‘just war’ and ‘terrorism’. “Terrorism is the random killing of innocent people, in the hope of creating pervasive fear” (Walzer, 2006).
According to just war, specific war can be justified or classified as just if it meets certain conditions. Just war defines war as a war that is really against military aggression or its threat. It also refers to an intentional threat that is serious in nature. It is also defined in other words as a war that includes the intervention of human rights.
Out of all the wars which took place in this century, the Second World War is considered to be the only occasion where one side of the conflict could be justified as following the criteria required for fighting a 'Just war'. The World war two was a global war of all the major military nations including the super powers.
Alan Dowd's article titled 'Civilization's Reluctant Warrior: America and the War on Terror' is an essay supporting America's war efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq. Given the readiness and enthusiasm with which the United States initiated war against Iraq in 2003, it is difficult to make sense of the phrase 'reluctant warrior'.
The Korean War was the first historical event where one nation intervened to protect another nation’s rights. Although some critics debate whether the Korean War was justified, the Just War Theory applies quite clearly.
North Korea invaded South Korea and violated