Michael Walzer, 'Noncombatant Immunity And Military Necessity'

1019 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Social impact from atomic bomb

Jordan Tibbett PHIL 401 Dr. Donoghue 3/18/14 In the essay, ”Noncombatant Immunity and Military Necessity” by Michael Walzer, the idea of a balanced protection of citizens being a right in times of war is discussed. The concept here is that the military, as a protective unit to society, should focus not only on protecting its nation’s civilians, but also on being successful in their military actions and endeavors. After examining some other sources of information regarding the atomic bomb and bombing of Japanese forces in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, I have been able to form an opinion of the justification and necessity in the situation. The idea of “nature of necessity” is a major concept discussed in Walzer’s essay and this particular concept relates to the reason of war or reasons for war. In his opinion, we can only justify the killing of people we already have reason to think are liable to be killed (Walzer, 144). He goes into detail in his description of this nature of necessity discussing the examples of the “naked soldiers”, or soldiers who are fighting for their nation’s war cause, but not actually fighting in the fullest meaning of the word. One of the example Walzer discusses in his tale of the naked soldiers is the soldier on patrol duty by himself unaware of the potential enemy snipers that could take him out at any point in time. Is it morally unethical and wrong for the opposing sniper to take out this patrol man who is not necessarily doing any harm at the moment? Walzer states that, “a naked man, like a funny man, is not a soldier”, and I myself completely agree with this statement (140). I believe that it is this thought here that indicates how war tactics should be carried out. Why harm innocent people who just happ... ... middle of paper ... ...ty of Hiroshima was completely unnecessary, and that the psychological and physical damage it left behind was enough to make the Japanese people lose all hope. I do understand that death is inevitable in times of war, but I don’t believe that this was the necessary face of death that should have been deemed necessary in this particular situation. This opinion is especially strengthened by the fact that many sources claim that Japan was going to surrender to American forces even before the atomic bomb was dropped. If we knew that the war was coming to a close, then why did we feel the need to go out with an unnecessary bang? It just does not seem morally or ethically right in my opinion and it is therefore why I feel that the atomic bombing of Hiroshima was not a justified act of military necessity, and was absolutely an unjustified violation of noncombatant immunity.

Show More
Related

  • Atomic Bomb Justified Dbq

    646 Words  | 2 Pages

    In discussion of the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, one controversial issue has the dropping of the atomic bombs being justified. On the other hand others believe that there were other ways of getting Japan to surrender and it was not justified, the only way we could get Japan to surrender was to invade them. Our strategy was to island hop until we got to Japan. Many more lives were at steak when doing that. Not only would just Americans would die, but a lot of the Japanese would have died as well, and the death toll would have much greater. 199,000 deaths came after the dropping of the atomic bombs. However, many American lives were saved, what the Japanese did to Pearl Harbor, and the treatment of our American soldiers while

    Read More

  • Comparative Analysis of A Few Good Men

    1375 Words  | 3 Pages

    The motion picture A Few Good Men challenges the question of why Marines obey their superiors’ orders without hesitation. The film illustrates a story about two Marines, Lance Corporal Harold W. Dawson and Private First Class Louden Downey charged for the murder of Private First Class William T. Santiago. Lieutenant Daniel Kaffee, who is known to be lackadaisical and originally considers offering a plea bargain in order to curtail Dawson’s and Downey’s sentence, finds himself fighting for the freedom of the Marines; their argument: they simply followed the orders given for a “Code Red”. The question of why people follow any order given has attracted much speculation from the world of psychology. Stanley Milgram, a Yale psychologist, conducted an experiment in which randomly selected students were asked to deliver “shocks” to an unknown subject when he or she answered a question wrong. In his article, “The Perils of Obedience”, Milgram concludes anyone will follow an order with the proviso that it is given by an authoritative figure. Two more psychologists that have been attracted to the question of obedience are Herbert C. Kelman, a professor at Harvard University, and V. Lee Hamilton, a professor at the University of Maryland. In their piece, Kelman and Hamilton discuss the possibilities of why the soldiers of Charlie Company slaughtered innocent old men, women, and children. The Marines from the film obeyed the ordered “Code Red” because of how they were trained, the circumstances that were presented in Guantanamo Bay, and they were simply performing their job.

    Read More

  • The Guilt They Carried in Tim O’Brien’s The Things They Carried

    1414 Words  | 3 Pages

    These men are transformed into guilt-laden soldiers in less than a day, as they all grapple for a way to come to terms with the pain of losing a comrade. In an isolated situation, removed from the stressors, anxieties, and uncertainties of war, perhaps they may have come to a more rational conclusion as to who is deserving of blame. But tragically, they cannot come to forgive themselves for something for which they are not even guilty. As Norman Bowker so insightfully put it prior to his unfortunate demise, war is “Nobody’s fault, everybody’s” (197).

    Read More

  • Atomic Bomb Dbq

    1981 Words  | 4 Pages

    The United States of America’s use of the atomic bomb on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki has spurred much debate concerning the necessity, effectiveness, and morality of the decision since August 1945. After assessing a range of arguments about the importance of the atomic bomb in the termination of the Second World War, it can be concluded that the use of the atomic bomb served as the predominant factor in the end of the Second World War, as its use lowered the morale, industrial resources, and military strength of Japan. The Allied decision to use the atomic bomb not only caused irreparable physical damage on two major Japanese cities, but its use also minimized the Japanese will to continue fighting. These two factors along

    Read More

  • The Benefits of Dropping an Atomic Bomb on Japan

    1278 Words  | 3 Pages

    The benefits that the bomb had on our society have been invaluable. Permitting the use of the atomic bomb was an atrocious mistake.In John Hersey's book, Hiroshima, he interviews a German priest serving in Japan. This priest, Father Kleinsorge, provides a first hand account of the immorality, justification, and consequences thereof; “The crux of the matter is whether total war in its present form is justifiable even when it s...

    Read More

  • Why the Atomic Bomb Was the Wrong Choice

    1354 Words  | 3 Pages

    World War II played host to some of the most gruesome and largest mass killings in history. From the start of the war in 1939 until the end of the war in 1945 there were three mass killings, by three big countries on those who they thought were lesser peoples. The rape of Nanking, which was carried out by the Japanese, resulted in the deaths of 150,000 to 200,000 Chinese civilians and POW. A more well-known event was of the Germans and the Holocaust. Hitler and the Nazi regime persecuted and killed over 500,000 Jews. This last country may come as a surprise, but there is no way that someone could leave them out of the conversation. With the dropping of the Atomic bombs the United States killed over 200,000, not including deaths by radiation, in the towns of Nagasaki and Hiroshima and ultimately placed the United States in the same group as the Japanese and the Germans. What are the alternatives other than dropping the two A-bombs and was it right? The United States and President Truman should have weighed their opting a little bit more before deciding to drop both atomic bombs on the Islands of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. In the case of dropping the atomic bombs the United States did not make the right decision. This essay will explain through logic reasoning and give detailed reasons as to why the United States did not make the right choice.

    Read More

  • Use of the Atomic Bomb Against Japan was Justified

    1127 Words  | 3 Pages

    The use of the atomic bomb against Japan was completely justified in both cause and impact. An intense weapon was necessary to force a quick Japanese surrender. The bomb saved thousands upon thousands of American and Japanese lives that would have been lost if the war continued or an invasion occurred. The bomb was the only way to end the suffering of the millions who were being held captive by the Japanese oppressor. The weapon of mass destruction also sent a powerful message to the shaky Soviet allies. The choice to use the atomic bomb was justified because it compelled a Japanese surrender, saved countless lives, served as retribution for the sufferings of many people, and acted as an anti-Soviet deterrent.

    Read More

  • Analysis Of The My Lai Massacre: A Military Crime Of Obedience

    1262 Words  | 3 Pages

    War has always been an essential ingredient in the development of the human race. As a result of the battles fought in ancient times, up until modern warfare, millions of innocent lives have ended as a result of war crimes committed. In the article, “The My Lai Massacre: A Military Crime of Obedience,” Herbert C. Kelman and V.Lee Hamilton shows examples of moral decisions taken by people involved with war-related murders. This article details one of the worse atrocities committed during the Vietnam War in 1968 by the U.S. military: the My Lai Massacre. Through this incident, the question that really calls for psychological analysis is why so many people are willing to formulate , participate in, and condone policies that call for the mass killings of defenseless civilians such as the atrocities committed during the My Lai massacre. What influences these soldiers by applying different psychological theories that have been developed on human behavior.

    Read More

  • Essay On The Atomic Bomb On Nagasaki

    1415 Words  | 3 Pages

    In conclusion, ever since the atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, it has been a major controversial argument amongst many people throughout the world. The United States was the first and only country in the world to use this type of weapon during a war Using the bomb was a major turning point in the war and it changed the world forever. Many Japanese were killed and the two cities were greatly destroyed. Besides the negative effects, the positive effects were that American and Japanese lost less people than they would have with a land invasion and the war ended quickly with Japan’s surrender as planned. The United States was justified in taking this action because the goals of the bomb were accomplished although the aftermath was dreadful.

    Read More

  • Prompt and Utter Destruction

    1090 Words  | 3 Pages

    Upon reading “Prompt and Utter Destruction: Truman and the Use of Atomic Bombs Against Japan” by J. Samuel Walker, a reader will have a clear understanding of both sides of the controversy surrounding Truman’s decision to drop atomic bombs on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War II. The controversy remains of whether or not atomic bombs should have been used during the war. After studying this text, it is clear that the first atomic bomb, which was dropped on the city of Hiroshima, was a necessary military tactic on ending the war. The second bomb, which was dropped on Nagasaki, however, was an unnecessary measure in ensuring a surrender from the Japanese, and was only used to seek revenge.

    Read More

  • Ronald Takakis Hiroshima

    2111 Words  | 5 Pages

    Although WW II ended over 50 years ago there is still much discussion as to the events which ended the War in the Pacific. The primary event which historians attribute to this end are the use of atomic bombs on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Although the bombing of these cities did force the Japanese to surrender, many people today ask “Was the use of the atomic bomb necessary to end the war?” and more importantly “Why was the decision to use the bomb made?” Ronald Takaki examines these questions in his book Hiroshima.

    Read More

  • Was The Dropping Of The Atomic Bomb Justified?

    2763 Words  | 6 Pages

    "Was the Atomic Bombing of Japan Justifiable?" The Pacific War 1941-43. Web. 10 June 2010.

    Read More

  • Experincing the Atomic Bombs in Japan

    604 Words  | 2 Pages

    On August 6, 1945, a plane called the Enola Gay dropped an atomic bomb on the city of Hiroshima. Instantly, 70,000 Japanese citizens were vaporized. In the months and years that followed, an additional 100,000 perished from burns and radiation sickness. Two days later, on August 9, a second atomic bomb was dropped on Nagasaki, where 80,000 Japanese people perished. The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki is one of the most controversial aspects in the history of the United States because many people believe that it wasn't a necessary action to win the war. While others think that using the atomic bombs on Japan was essential because it saved many American lives. The bombing of Nagasaki, caused catastrophic damage to the city and its people, leaving people to question why did this event occur?

    Read More

  • Ethics in War Are Necessary

    815 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Politician and the soldier have a common goal; to win the war. But there is a difference in their mindsets. The politician, safe behind his desk, has never experienced the fear and terror of being in battle. He has not seen the blood or heard the screams of suffering soldiers. He has not watched his best friend die in his arms after being hit my enemy fire. He is an onlooker, free to analyze and critique every aspect of the war from the safety of his office. He is free and safe to talk of ethics and proper war etiquette. The soldier, immersed in battle, fighting for his life, can think of only one thing. Kill or be killed. When bullets are flying past his face and mortar shells are exploding all around him, he is not mindful of fighting ethically. Nor is he even mindful of fighting for his country. He is fighting for his life. To stay alive, he must kill the enemy, destroy the enemy. The longer the war persists, the more likely he will not go home alive.

    Read More

  • War Crime Essay

    1125 Words  | 3 Pages

    There are many different types of war crimes military personnel can commit. Some examples include murder, medical experiments, crimes against whole civilian population members and crimes against war prisoners. A general war crime is a crime “in which both civilians and prisoners of war were victims” (“War Crimes”). The general offenses of war crimes include crimes against peace and crimes against humanity. The broadest definition of...

    Read More

More about Michael Walzer, 'Noncombatant Immunity And Military Necessity'

Open Document