Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Women during war and conflict
Women during war and conflict
Just war theory questions
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Women during war and conflict
The just war theory is a traditional doctrine put together in previous times, used to justify the rights and wrongs of countries going to war, by using ethical standing and moral backgrounds. This theory states that if two countries were to go to war, they should do so for the right reasons and conduct it in a manner where human rights are not violated.
The author discussed that the just war theory does not solely hold true to modern warfare that goes on today. Taking from a principle that was created long ago when men made and enforced rules, there was no feminine input, even though wars that raged during these times had a massive effect on women and children. In these present times, there is no such thing as a traditional war. All types
…show more content…
However, this is not currently the case due to the atrocities inflicted on women and children in modern warfare. In ancient times women were looked at as innocent, even though they were thought of as weak. With that being said, women were always ultimately protected by men, who are known as worriers, and the females were the prize of the war. (Sjoberg, 2008) wrote, “The element of just war theory that many feminists note spans both times and culture is the image of women as the protected and the prize.” (Why Just War Needs Feminism Now More Than Ever, pg.4). Throughout history, conflicts and battles have revolved around or included saving females or the damsel in distress. Additionally, because patriarchy was a major root of the just theory, females were being excluded from being leaders or any means of having a voice. Men were deemed care givers, protectors, and rulers over the land, with women having little to no insights on any decision making. Women had little choice of decisions about their future, other than raising and taking care of children. “Rightfully”, men made all the choices and the decisions that affected the household. With that being said, women were giving the roles that they are categorized with, without asking for or voluntarily accepting these roles. In fact, they had no choice but to accept these roles that were forced onto them. (Sjoberg, 2008) wrote, …show more content…
Terrorist do not claim one specific country, but instead they are broken up into groups that are situated all over the world. With America’s war on terrorism, they essentially declare war on many innocent civilians and every country that host a terrorist cell. With that being said, there is no just way to say what America is doing is right or wrong. One thing for certain is that, it does affect many civilians. With America declaring war on Afghanistan, assuming that they are the culprits for the September 11 attacks, they are putting many innocent lives in danger that is already suffering from social, economic and political issues. (Sjoberg 2008), wrote, “in addition to the continuing civil strife, the country suffers from enormous poverty, a crumbling infrastructure, and widespread live mines… Emotional identification with people in such a desire situation in terms of economic welfare, healthcare, and education availability suggests a need for empathy and a politics of care.” (Why just war needs feminism, pg.11). While these types of conflicts happening in the world today, it makes you wonder why theologians and policy makers have not revised the just war theory. These conflicts are not being fought on a normal battle field like times in the past. Instead, they are being fought all around us, in the middle of the streets in our cities and towns, in the middle of
Throughout history, women have been mistreated as the weaker gender. It has been evident throughout the epic of Sunjata, the history of Greek society as well as Indian society. It is evident today with the social classes we have formed that there are predominant gender roles in our society; history as we know tends to repeat itself.
The idea of war and how it can be justified, is a rather trick topic to touch on, as there are diverse ethical and sociological implications that have to be weighed on every step. Mainly we could look at the “Just War Theory” and see how that could possibly apply to the real world. To be able to enter a “Just War” nations must meet six criteria in Jus ad Bellum (Going to War). The criteria is as follows: “Just Cause”, “Right Intention”, “Proper Authority and Public Declaration”, “Last Resort”, “Probability of Success”, and lastly “Proportionality”. However the tricky bit of the Just War theory, is that all six of those elements must be met, to go to war in a morally justifiable way. This could make an easy blockade for nations to veto another nation's effort to enter a war, even if morally justifiable. The problem with an internationally mandated “war-committee”, means that the fate of another nation's well-being could very well be in the hands of a nation with an ulterior motive. It could also fall into the grounds of new found illegal activity. Lets give a hypothetical situation, say nation 'X' wants to go to war with nation 'Y' in an act of self-defence, but it doesn't meet some of the requirements for “Just War theory” and is thus blocked by the war-committee. Then as a consequence, nation 'X' is invaded and annexed due to lack of defence. Nation 'X' could have made an effort to prepare for war, but at the cost of possibly being condemned and sanctioned by the war-committee. In an overall view, it's easy to see why the UN or other major international coalitions will not adopt a system based around Just War Theory.
McDonald. “Just War Theory.” Humanities. Boston University. College of General Studies, Boston. 24 February 2014. Lecture.
“Never think that war, no matter how necessary, nor how justified, is not a crime.” As depicted in the quote by Ernest Hemingway war is a difficult situation in which the traditional boundaries of moral ethics are tested. History is filled with unjust wars and for centuries war was not though in terms of morality. Saint Augustine, however, offered a theory detailing when war is morally permissible. The theory offers moral justifications for war as expressed in jus ad bellum (conditions for going to war) and in jus in bello (conditions within warfare).The theory places restrictions on the causes of war as well as the actions permitted throughout. Within early Christianity, the theory was used to validate crusades as morally permissible avoiding conflict with religious views. Based on the qualifications of the Just War Theory few wars have been deemed as morally acceptable, but none have notably met all the requirements. Throughout the paper I will apply Just War Theory in terms of World War II as well as other wars that depict the ideals presented by Saint Augustine.
Men have always been looked upon as the leading sex. Looking back through history women have been the ones who take care of the home and children, while men are the ones who work and go to war. However in recent years there’s no doubt that women have become much more equal in the work force. Nevertheless men are still the ones who are forced to fight our wars when the time calls for it. Many think that women should be entirely equal to men having their choice to be drafted taken away but the fact is that they are physically at a disadvantage, too emotionally oriented, and the increase of female presence would have a more negative impact in the military in the way of social interactions.
Since the resolution of World War II, the United States has been involved in over fifteen extensive military wars. Recent wars between Iraq and Afghanistan are being fought over several issues which affect women in both the United States and the other nations. While the military is often thought of a male dominated institution, women are present and affected all throughout the system as soldiers, caretakers, partners, and victims. Transnational feminists often fight against war due to the vulnerability that is placed on women during times of war. Despite often being overlooked, there is no doubt that women are heavily included in the devastating consequences of war.
September 11th, 2001. An organization denoted as terrorists by the United States, Al-Qaeda, attacked the U.S on our own soil. In his “Letter to the American People”, the leader of Al-Qaeda, Osama Bin Laden, takes a defensive stance regarding the attack, giving his justifications of why the attack on the U.S was warranted and acceptable in the terms of Just War Theory, citing examples of the Right to Self-Defense and reasons why he was justified in targeting American civilians. Just War Theory is comprised of ideas of values to determine when acts of aggression are morally justified or not, and it is primarily split into two categories, Jus Ad Bellum (Justice of War) and Jus In Bello (Justice in War) (Walzer 21). In this essay, I will be arguing against Bin Laden’s claims of the justification of Al-Qaeda’s attack, using the failure of Bin Laden’s attack to meet the requirements for a just war in terms of Jus Ad Bellum and Jus In Bello.
Warfare has always been experienced differently by men and women. In many cases, men are in the frontline and face different conditions as compared to women who are on the home front. World War I is one of the most discussed wars that the world has experienced so far. The sheer extent to which the war affected people in different countries around the different continents around the world is appalling. The structure of the society was shaken by World War I. People no longer lived according to the norms they had known before. Both men and women had to adjust in order to fit the societal experience brought about by the war. Though suffering was experienced by both men and women despite where they were during the war, their experiences were completely different thus making it important to look at these experiences from a deeper perspective.
The Just War Theory has been shaped over the centuries by historians and philosophers. However, the most systematic account of the Just War Theory was formulated by Saint Thomas Aquinas in his Summa Theologicae. According to the Just War Theory, the moral reality of war is divided into two parts. Wars are judged twice, first with reference to the reasons nations have for fighting and secondly, with reference to the means they adopt in the actual fighting. (Walzer, 21) The first judgment is referred to as jus ad bellum, or justice of war. The second judgment is referred to as jus in bello, or justice in war. Jus ad bellum provides guidelines for assessing whether a war is just or unjust while jus in bello outlines proper conduct in war. Jus ad bellum does not imply jus in bello. Likewise, jus in bello does not necessitate jus ad bellum. It is possible for a just war to be fought unjustly just as it is possible for an unjust war to be fought justly.
Many, including the Catholic Church, judge the justifications of a war based on several factors given in the “just war theory,” which is used to evaluate the war based on its causes and means. The first required factor is a just cause, meaning that a nation’s decision to begin a war must be due to “substantial aggression” brought about by the opposition which cannot be resolved through non-violent solutions without excessive cost whereas armed conflict is not hopeless or excessively costly (“Just War Theory”1). In most cases, wars are started for a reason; however, many of these reasons are for the benefit of the governments who start the wars. The just war theory is widely accepted as a way to determine the moral standing of the reasons. This part of the theory is to ensure that the objective of a war is a reasonable and moral one. It prevents the needless bloodshed and loss of human lives over petty disputes while still protecting the rights and lives of the innocent by acknowledging the necessity of war in dire situations.
The just war theory is described by Thomas Massaro in his book Living Justice as the “principle that warfare might be justified under certain conditions” (108). The complexities involved with international relations makes determining a just war very difficult. Even though historically pacifism hasn’t gained much traction within Catholic circles, it currently is gaining popularity with many mainstream Catholics. With so many differing views on military action, one might ask, “What determines a just war? How can we balance the need for peace with self-defense?” An examination of criteria for a just war and critiques written on this topic might shed light on these two questions.
The principles of Just War theory and different ethical frameworks have been used for many years to justify and reject plans for military interventions. These ideologies are useful tools for the leaders of governments and militaries to discuss and make decisions on the morality of different courses of action. If ISIS launched a series of terrorist attacks on American embassies as hypothesized, the given plan for military intervention would be morally justified due to several principles of Just War theory and various ethical frameworks. These include the ideas of jus ad bellum and jus post bellum from Just War theory and the ethical ideologies of utilitarianism and common good ethics.
roles before the war were very basic and women didn't get many rights because men
First, war is universal due to its violent nature, violence in its application knows no bounds, and it is the common factor that identifies the war and without it the war is nothing more than a diplomatic effort to reach the end. However, wars blow out only when the diplomacy fails. Violence is the war engine. Although the application of violence evolved through time and its severity varies according to communities, cultures, and the means and methods used. Demonstrating the violence through the application of force to subjugate the enemy is the central idea of war. “War is a clash between major interests,
Throughout history, there have been constant power struggles between men and women, placing the male population at a higher position than the female. Therefore, in this patriarchal system women have always been discriminated against simply due to the fact that they are women. Their rights to vote, to be educated and essentially being treated equally with men was taken away from them and they were viewed as weak members of society whose successes depend on men. However, this has not prevented them from fighting for what they believe in and the rights they are entitled to. On the contrary, it has motivated them to try even harder and gain these basic societal rights through determination and unity.