The moral obligation that was behind the choice of choosing war over alternatives was due to the conceptual promise that this country made. The United States had morally obliged itself to bringing freedom to the people of Iraq and also promised to bring a new diplomacy to the country so many lives could start fresh, with a renowned sense of freedom that Iraqi people had never known before. Common sense tells society that a situation, such as the one in Iraq requires more than one duty, relieving distress and following through with a promise. Furthermore, one of the most detrimental parts of any moral theory is the implied idea that it is being carried out for “respecting the rights and serving the interests of others, not matter what the cost to ourselves may be” (W.D. Ross’s Moral Theory 2005, p.1).
This is evident in what has been transpiring in the Middle East for the last three years. The whole moral reasoning behind still being within the country is the duty that we still have to serve and protect the Iraqi people until there is more of a settled peace present. A very substantial theory that seems to offer validity into the points the theory of war is trying to make is the ‘Hubris Theory’. “Human hubris leads us to believe that an action (such as war) would help satisfy our desires, needs, and so on—in short, the fact that an action would promote our interests-as a reason in favor of doing it” (Rachel’s Chapter 14, p.1). Basically, this whole implement of thought coincides with why war takes place. War happens for all the seemingly morally right reasons but bad things do take place. Many people die but this is an accepted choice of war. In the long term, it is chosen as the only morally and ethically sound judgment available.
War is never the primary choice by anyone, but it is utilized when all other methods of logical reasoning have met with adversity but no resolution. It is then that the moral decision has to be made as to what the ethical decision should be to end tyranny and torture, such as was stemming from the country of Iraq. Humanity has evolved over the centuries into a very social sense of being. Therefore, we live together in groups, and enjoy one another's company, and strive for unified cooperation, giving a very capable means of caring for one another's well being, even in a foreign land where injustice lies (Rachel 2002, p.1). The literature expressed is the moral justification of the war in Iraq and also is relevant to wars of the past as well. Morally we wanted to see wrongs turned to rights and after attempting all other means to the point of mental exhaustion, war seemed to be the only remedy to end a violent cycle of constant killing.
In conclusion, Kant's theory on moral motivation sums this paper up best. War stems from amoral of reason, as Kant's theory includes rational thinking and deduction as reasons in behind moral motivation. 'It is the freedom of will'