The Pros And Cons Of Fair War

1032 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Ethics of war

Set of conditions under which war is morally justified (jus ad bellum); and also ethical rules of war (jus in bello). As conditions of fair war the following was offered: its reasons have to be fair (e.g., self-defense at attack or at threat of inevitable attack), the authorities resorting to a war, precisely know that all peace alternatives and that there are reasonable hopes for success of war are settled. Two major conditions for conducting fair war are that use of force has to be "proportional" to that fair reason for which war (in the sense that the evil generated by war is begun, shouldn't exceed the benefit represented by the fair reason) and that it is necessary to carry out distinction between military and innocent (citizens not participating in operations) which shouldn't be killed. The concept of fair war was developed in early Christian church; in the 4th century over it St. Augustine reflected; in the 17th century it was divided by Gugo Grotsy. In the subsequent time interest to this concept decreased. It again increased in the 20th eyelid in connection with development of the nuclear weapon (which use, according to some researchers, could violate proportionality and differentiation conditions), and also in connection with emergence of "humanitarian interventions", directed on putting an end to genocide and other crimes committed in borders of the certain state.

The principles of fair war – the fundamental requirements defining ethic and legal conditions of the beginning of military operations (war) and their maintaining. The theory of fair war represents, along with realism (according to Krom war is the fact of life and though the benefit would be maximum to reduce its negative consequences, completely they can't be...

... middle of paper ...

...on preservation of human lives, in particular the civilian population. Due to the tendency which has outlined since Napoleonic wars of the increasing involvement of the civilian population in military operations relevance of the principles of fair war steadily increases; creation of weapons of mass destruction in particular increases value of fair war. Though the idea of fair war has centuries-old history and its principles are fixed in a number of the international documents accepted after the II world war, ethical reliability of the principles of fair war for ordinary people is unevident especially as in one war they completely weren't executed. The moral and legal sense of fair war consists that they allow to rationalize standard restrictions of military actions and to formulate accurate criteria of a moral and legal assessment of such immoral phenomenon, as war.

Show More
Related

  • What Combat Requires in Philip Caputo's Rumor of War

    1230 Words  | 3 Pages

    Laws exist to protect life and property; however, they are only as effective as the forces that uphold them. War is a void that exists beyond the grasps of any law enforcing agency and It exemplifies humankind's most desperate situation. It is an ethical wilderness exempt from civilized practices. In all respects, war is a primitive extension of man. Caputo describes the ethical wilderness of Vietnam as a place "lacking restraints, sanctioned to kill, confronted by a hostile country and a relentless enemy, we sank into a brutish state." Without boundaries, there is only a biological moral c...

    Read More

  • Summary Of Jeff Mcmahan's Killing In War (2009)

    1534 Words  | 4 Pages

    Throughout history, war has been the catalyst that has compelled otherwise-ordinary people to discard, at least for its duration, their longstanding beliefs about the immorality of killing their fellow human beings. In sum, during periods of war, people’s views about killing others are fundamentally transformed from abhorrence to glorification due in large part to the decisions that are made by their political leaders. In this regard, McMahan points out that, “As soon as conditions arise to which the word ‘war’ can be applied, our scruples vanish and killing people no longer seems a horrifying crime but becomes instead a glorious achievement” (vii). Therefore, McMahan argues that the transformation of mainstream views about the morality of killing during times of war are misguided and flawed since they have been based on the traditional view that different moral principles somehow apply in these circumstances. This traditional view about a just war presupposes the morality of the decision to go to war on the part of political leaders in the first place and the need to suspend traditional views about the morality of killing based on this

    Read More

  • Military Ethics – Humanitarian Aid in Somalia

    2908 Words  | 6 Pages

    Jus ad bellum is defined as “justice of war” and is recognized as the ethics leading up to war (Orend 31). Orend contends that an...

    Read More

  • Essay On War Powers

    2436 Words  | 5 Pages

    War powers refers to the powers exercised by Congress or the president during times of war or other crises affecting national security. Article 2, Section 2 of the US Constitution declares that the president is the Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States. He may direct the military after an official declaration of war from Congress. There is a lot of disagreement and confusion about what exactly the president has the power to do under the Constitution. The purpose of this paper is to determine what war powers the constitution and Congress give the president, domestically and abroad during times of war, and what the scope of those powers is.

    Read More

  • Just war theory

    1005 Words  | 3 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • The Correct Decision of Dropping the Bombs on Hiroshima

    1200 Words  | 3 Pages

    McDonald. “Just War Theory.” Humanities. Boston University. College of General Studies, Boston. 24 February 2014. Lecture.

    Read More

  • Debunking Bin Laden's Just War Theory Claims

    1112 Words  | 3 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • The Just War Theory

    1705 Words  | 4 Pages

    “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.

    Read More

  • The Meaning of “Story-Truth” and “Happening-Truth”

    1005 Words  | 3 Pages

    A true war story is never moral. It does not instruct, nor encourage virtue, nor suggest models of proper human behavior, nor restrain ...

    Read More

  • Opposition to the Vietnam War

    2708 Words  | 6 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Analysis of Just and Unjust Wars: A Moral Argument with Historical Illustrations

    1192 Words  | 3 Pages

    justice of war and the justice in war in a great depth, and uses numerous historical

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of War

    1543 Words  | 4 Pages

    Every day we are surrounded by stories of war. In fact, we have become so accustomed to it, that we are now entertained by it. Video games, movies, and books filled with heroes who once dominated the battlefields. However it is constantly stated, “no good comes from war.” Even famous songs state “war... what is it good for… absolutely nothing.” But what if war was actually necessary? Throughout history, we see examples of the good things wars have brought. War has freed slaves, modernized medicine, brought down evil empires, and even brought countries together

    Read More

  • A Critical Analysis Of Thomas Nagel's War And Massacre

    1542 Words  | 4 Pages

    Relations between countries are similar to interpersonal relations. When the conflicts between countries escalates to some extent, any resolutions become unrealistic except violence, and wars then occur. Although wars already include death and pain, moralists suggest that there should still be some moral restrictions on them, including the target toward whom the attack in a war should be performed, and the manner in which it is to be done. A philosopher named Thomas Nagel presents his opinion and develops his argument on such topic in the article “War and Massacre”. In this essay, I will describe and explain his main argument, try to propose my own objection to it, and then discuss how he would respond to my objection.

    Read More

  • The Moral Equivalent of War by William James

    1130 Words  | 3 Pages

    War is a hard thing to describe. It has benefits that can only be reaped through its respective means. Means that, while necessary, are harsh and unforgiving. William James, the author of “The Moral Equivalent of War”, speaks only of the benefits to be had and not of the horrors and sacrifices found in the turbulent times of war. James bears the title of a pacifist, but he heralds war as a necessity for society to exist. In the end of his article, James presents a “war against nature” that would, in his opinion, stand in war’s stead in bringing the proper characteristics to our people. However, my stance is that of opposition to James and his views. I believe that war, while beneficial in various ways, is unnecessary and should be avoided at all costs.

    Read More

  • Just War Theory Essay

    763 Words  | 2 Pages

    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.

    Read More

More about The Pros And Cons Of Fair War

Open Document