Just War Theory

Cypress said:
Afghanistan is a hard one to clearly peg.

Tolstoy's Christian pacifism obviously is naive at the scale of national foreign policy, though it could work at the scale of a social movement - like Martin Luther King's civil rights movement.

Whatever can be said about the merits of the different theories of war, the fact that international law post WW2 adopted just war theory as it's basic premise seems to have prevented the kinds of global conflagrations we saw in the first half of the 20th century.
Click to expand...

yes, as intended. people were so over wars by that point.
 
Cypress said:
The ethics of warfare in the modern Western tradition: pacifism,
realism,
and just war theory.

Realism is the view that the rightful sources of state action are its interests and its recognition of its own power and the limits thereof. The best we can hope for is a relatively peaceful balance of power among states. But the use of civic morality in making international and military policy is wrong-headed, silly, and dangerous.

Pacifists fall into three camps: Christian pacifists, such as Tolstoy; nonviolent resisters, such as Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr.; and just war pacifists, who hold that although some violent actions might be just in principle, today’s technological warfare is so deadly that war can never be justified by just war theory.

Just war theory has a series of rules for jus ad bellum (“justice in going to war”) and jus in bello (“justice in waging war”). Remarkably, just war theory—a philosophical theory—became official international policy in the 20thcentury. A just war can only include legitimate self-defence or humanitarian intervention in extremely limited and specific cases. Intervention becomes permissible—indeed, obligatory—with “massive” violations of rights, ethnic cleansing, or systematic massacre.



Source credit: Lawrence Cahoon, professor of political philosophy
Click to expand...


Just War Theory=It's just war.
 
Celticguy said:
yes, as intended. people were so over wars by that point.
Click to expand...

It's not just that people were tired of war.

Europeans were exhausted from the 30 Years War.

What was different about the post WW2 canon of international law, was that the first time in human history, nations of the world agreed that offensive war was unlawful and subject to collective international response.
 
Cypress said:
It's not just that people were tired of war.

Europeans were exhausted from the 30 Years War.
Click to expand...

how is that different from what I said ?

What was different about the post WW2 canon of international law, was that the first time in human history, nations of the world agreed that offensive war was unlawful and subject to collective international response.
Click to expand...

realistically it wasnt until then that the world was "small" enough for such a level of agreement.
 
History of War Ethics

The discussion of the ethics of war goes back to the Greeks and Romans.


Hugo Grotius (1583-1645), a Dutch philosopher and author of De Jure Belli Ac Pacis (The Rights of War and Peace), wrote down the conditions for a just war that are accepted today; that war is justifiable only if a country faces imminent danger and the use of force is both necessary and proportionate to the threat


Cicero argued that there was no acceptable reason for war outside of just vengeance or self defence - in which he included the defence of honour.

He also argued that a war could not be just unless it was publicly declared and unless compensation for the enemy's offence had first been demanded.

Cicero based his argument on the assumption that nature and human reason biased a society against war, and that there was a fundamental code of behaviour for nations.


Saint Augustine was a 4th century Christian who lived in Algeria and Italy. He believed that the only just reason to go to war was the desire for peace.

Augustine tried to reconcile Christian pacifism with the world as it actually was; to bring together the pacifist teachings of Jesus Christ with the obligations of Roman citizens - including Christians - to fight for their country when required to.

Augustine accepted that there would always be wars. He thought that war was always a sin, and if there had to be a war, it should be waged with sadness.

But Augustine said that war was always the result of sin, and that war was also the remedy for sin. And if war was the remedy for sin, then war could sometimes be justifiable - but only if it was a remedy for sin.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/war/just/history.shtml
 
It looks like Russia is ready to invade Ukraine. Will any Country come to the aid of Ukraine militarily? Or ... will it just be 'sanctions'?

If Iran attacks Israel, will there be 'sanctions'?
If Israel attacks Iran, will there be 'sanctions'?

Can Russia or Israel claim 'preemptive strike', because they feel another Country is going to attack them?
 
Cypress said:
This message board has a long and lurid history of posters relentlessly defending the Iraq invasion, beating the war drums against Iran, and demanding that we continue a military commitment in Afghanistan.

To me the question is whether these posters consider any legitimate moral basis and ethical framework for the wars they desire. Or if war to them is strictly an amoral, political calculation.
Click to expand...

Trigger happy is their issue!
 
Mr Apollyon said:
Is this about Jerry Lee Louis?
Click to expand...



"Did Jerry Lee Lewis stay married to his 13-year-old cousin?

In 1958, Lewis married his 13-year-old cousin causing a record boycott but Lewis continued performing and made a comeback. He was inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 1986.

Jerry Lee Lewis - Spouse, Songs & Age - Biography"
 
Jack said:
It looks like Russia is ready to invade Ukraine. Will any Country come to the aid of Ukraine militarily? Or ... will it just be 'sanctions'?

If Iran attacks Israel, will there be 'sanctions'?
If Israel attacks Iran, will there be 'sanctions'?

Can Russia or Israel claim 'preemptive strike', because they feel another Country is going to attack them?
Click to expand...

There is not going to be an open conventional war by the Russian military against Ukraine.

Putin is too smart for that, he has other options at his disposal.

Iran and Israel do not share a common border nor do they have blue water navies. Open, conventional war between them is not realistically possible.

Preventative war is contrary to international law and just war theory.
 
Cypress said:
The ethics of warfare in the modern Western tradition: pacifism,
realism,
and just war theory.

Realism is the view that the rightful sources of state action are its interests and its recognition of its own power and the limits thereof. The best we can hope for is a relatively peaceful balance of power among states. But the use of civic morality in making international and military policy is wrong-headed, silly, and dangerous.

Pacifists fall into three camps: Christian pacifists, such as Tolstoy; nonviolent resisters, such as Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr.; and just war pacifists, who hold that although some violent actions might be just in principle, today’s technological warfare is so deadly that war can never be justified by just war theory.

Just war theory has a series of rules for jus ad bellum (“justice in going to war”) and jus in bello (“justice in waging war”). Remarkably, just war theory—a philosophical theory—became official international policy in the 20thcentury. A just war can only include legitimate self-defence or humanitarian intervention in extremely limited and specific cases. Intervention becomes permissible—indeed, obligatory—with “massive” violations of rights, ethnic cleansing, or systematic massacre.



Source credit: Lawrence Cahoon, professor of political philosophy
Click to expand...

As a "just war' advocate, I was 100% certain that the one into which I was forced wasn't one of those.
My dad's couldn't have been more obviously just, but mine---pure bullshit.
Nevertheless, the casualties were just as real, total fucking waste that they were.
 
NiftyNiblick said:
As a "just war' advocate, I was 100% certain that the one into which I was forced wasn't one of those.
My dad's couldn't have been more obviously just, but mine---pure bullshit.
Nevertheless, the casualties were just as real, total fucking waste that they were.
Click to expand...

If you are talking about Vietnam, that was obviously not a just war.

What is remarkable about it in hindsight is how easily we can fool ourselves with elaborate, but totally bogus, reasons to justify waging war.
 
Cypress said:
The ethics of warfare in the modern Western tradition: pacifism,
realism,
and just war theory.

Realism is the view that the rightful sources of state action are its interests and its recognition of its own power and the limits thereof. The best we can hope for is a relatively peaceful balance of power among states. But the use of civic morality in making international and military policy is wrong-headed, silly, and dangerous.

Pacifists fall into three camps: Christian pacifists, such as Tolstoy; nonviolent resisters, such as Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr.; and just war pacifists, who hold that although some violent actions might be just in principle, today’s technological warfare is so deadly that war can never be justified by just war theory.

Just war theory has a series of rules for jus ad bellum (“justice in going to war”) and jus in bello (“justice in waging war”). Remarkably, just war theory—a philosophical theory—became official international policy in the 20thcentury. A just war can only include legitimate self-defence or humanitarian intervention in extremely limited and specific cases. Intervention becomes permissible—indeed, obligatory—with “massive” violations of rights, ethnic cleansing, or systematic massacre.



Source credit: Lawrence Cahoon, professor of political philosophy
Click to expand...

There are no ethics of warfare.
 
Guille said:
There are no ethics of warfare.
Click to expand...

Explain why most nations have signed international treaties outlawing offensive war, reasonable treatment of prisoners of war, and bans on chemical weapons, if there isn't at least a desire for just war ethics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top