When is war justified?

[jiacinto]

I ask this question because this is what I think. I supported war with Afghanistan but not Iraq. I didn't support the idea of war with Iraq because I was convinced that the aftermath would not be managed properly. I didn't like how Bush et al went against the UN. I do think getting Sadaam out of power was a decent goal, but I disapproved of the methods Bush used.

But when is war justified? Is everyone here simply pacifistic?

[wuushew]

1. World War II

the following are invalid



Mexican-American War
Spanish-American War
WWI
Korea
Vietnam
Panama
Gulf War II
War on Drugs

[Fixated]

4. ....

You support Gulf War I but not Korea?

[wuushew]

5. There is evidence that South Korea attacked the North first

also the south was a corrupt puppet state of the US. Also the U.N. stated goal was reunification of the pennisula following election in which the communists would have one in fair elections.

Gulf War 1 had many problems but the steps taken were measured, thought out and had broad support in the Arab and international community.

[Darranar]

11. Actually...

the North Korean government refused to allow elections, not the South Korean government.

Since when did the South Koreans attack first?

They certainly were corrupt, though. There I agree.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

25. Fifty Years Later South Korea

ia a functioning liberal democracy and they are eating grass in North Korea.

[wuushew]

33. South Korea was a dictatorship until 1980

and before the 1950 war North Korea had a superior industrial infrastructe and standard of living, which of course was destroyed during the war.

Why does North Korea suck? Fear of the west and a failed soviet style command economy. No mystery there

[StandWatie]

8. gulf war I was an excellent war

I have problems with the way it was executed and I didn't enjoy the propaganda but the UN should at all times act militarily if necessary to enforce the illegality of conquest.

As a matter of fact it should attack US forces in Iraq like yesterday.

[DrWeird]

10. So than an invasion of the US would be justified?

Because what we did to Iraq is basically the same thing that Iraq did to Kuwait.

[StandWatie]

13. Right..

and the incursions into Iraq were gratitous. So no, it would only be the same thing if we were attacked on American soil only in the goal of liberating Iraq (from us).

[jagguy]

19. the UN has never and cannot act militarily

they have no army, navy or airforce. They ask members to do the dirty work.

[StandWatie]

21. Korea..

:shrug:

[Darranar]

2. War is sometimes, though very rarely, justified...

When all peaceful means clearly won't work and a severe humanitarian crisis is in effect, or a severe national security threat exists somewhere and it can't be solved through peaceful means.

[kentuck]

3. It may be necessary if someone invades your country...

Or if someone drops bombs on you? But only if it is done in the name of a supportive country...not the same as an independent individual or even a group of terrorists. On those types of characters, we should declare a "police action" and clean them out -- more or less what we did in Afghanistan. We did not declare war on Afghanistan.

And it could be argued that we could justifiably go to war to prevent ethnic cleansing or a holocaust. But not for pre-emptive reasons that cannot be proved...

[StandWatie]

6. when you get invaded..

Maybe when something is happening so repelent that it warrants action (Kosovo, with the caveat that I've never really believed the military was necessary to get rid of Milosovic, all they needed to do was put the screws on Russia and Russian pressure would get rid of him which is basically what happened).

[buddhamama]

7. World War 2

was justified,imho. i wish we had entered sooner. some actions taken during the war, i do not agree with, but the war itself i did.

i can support humanitarian efforts in cases of genocide. however, that does not mean anything goes. we must retain our humanity even during times of conflict.

[Darranar]

12. Agreed completely, buddhamama!

n/t

[jfkennedy]

9. Wars are crimes and never justified

Of the 1326 wars the world has had from the day the world started to now, not one of these wars to end all wars has worked. Wars and conflicts only bring about more conflicts. It is only by pacific means and principles will the world see a lasting peace.

Our whole structure of government needs to change about its war machine and the military-industrial-complex. That is we need to change the name of the Department of Defense to the Department of Non-Violence. Cut the military budget by 95% because a large army is just an easy target.

Dismantle all atomic, biological and Chemical (ABC) weapons and stockpiles.

Shut down the CIA and give spy operations to the new non-violent US Army.

Create a non-violent Army, Navy, Air force and Marine Corps.

Outlaw the death penalty for National Security (PR reasons).

Pull all troops out of overseas countries.

Increase Airline Security, and the transportation system.

Ban all hunting and the ownership of guns.

Wars are in fact crimes and we as a nation should honor the Kellogg-Briand Pact outlawing war. This 1928 treaty, which was signed by the United States and every other nation, pledges nations to resolve conflicts only by pacific means.

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/imt/kbpact.htm

[Darranar]

15. What if we're attacked?

What if mass slaughter is ntaking place in another country? Do we stand by and watch?

[Brian Sweat]

14. War is justified

1. When a country defends itself or an ally from another country.

2. To remove a brutal government from power. This is a delicate situation. The needs to be a high level of confidence that invading a sovereign nation to remove its government will significantly improve things for its people.

3. To end a civil war. This is another delicate situation. Invading antoher country to end a civil war is only justifiable if you are confident that you can put a permanent end to the conflict without making things worse.

[prolesunited]

16. If you really would like to explore this topic

here's some reading for you:

Just War Theory
Just war theory deals with the justification of how and why wars are fought. ... Against these two ethical positions, just war theory offers a series of principles that aim to retain a plausible moral framework for war. From the just war (justum bellum) tradition, theorists distinguish between the rules that govern the justice of war (jus ad bellum) from those that govern just and fair conduct in war (jus in bello). The two are by no means mutually exclusive, but they offer a set of moral guidelines for waging war that are neither unrestricted nor too restrictive. The problem for ethics involves expounding the guidelines in particular wars or situations.

http://www.utm.edu/research/iep/j/justwar.htm

Principles of the Just War
A just war can only be waged as a last resort. All non-violent options must be exhausted before the use of force can be justified.

A war is just only if it is waged by a legitimate authority. Even just causes cannot be served by actions taken by individuals or groups who do not constitute an authority sanctioned by whatever the society and outsiders to the society deem legitimate.

A just war can only be fought to redress a wrong suffered. For example, self-defense against an armed attack is always considered to be a just cause (although the justice of the cause is not sufficient--see point #4). Further, a just war can only be fought with "right" intentions: the only permissible objective of a just war is to redress the injury.

A war can only be just if it is fought with a reasonable chance of success. Deaths and injury incurred in a hopeless cause are not morally justifiable.

The ultimate goal of a just war is to re-establish peace. More specifically,the peace established after the war must be preferable to the peace that would have prevailed if the war had not been fought.

The violence used in the war must be proportional to the injury suffered. States are prohibited from using force not necessary to attain the limited objective of addressing the injury suffered.

The weapons used in war must discriminate between combatants and non-combatants. Civilians are never permissible targets of war, and every effort must be taken to avoid killing civilians. The deaths of civilians are justified only if they are unavoidable victims of a deliberate attack on a military target.

http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/pol116/justwar.htm

Principles of a just war condemn US campaign
America is violating its own ideals, writes former US president Jimmy Carter.
Profound changes have been taking place in American foreign policy, reversing consistent bipartisan commitments that for more than two centuries have earned our nation greatness. These commitments have been predicated on basic religious principles, respect for international law and alliances that resulted in wise decisions and mutual restraint. Our apparent determination to launch a war against Iraq, without international support, is a violation of these premises.
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/03/15/1047583740009.html

Alternatives to War
Article Text: Does even one person have to die when there are alternatives to the war in Iraq? President Bush has stated that all life is precious and he cares about all human life. Does this include Iraqi children, mothers, and military conscripts or just American lives? Are there alternatives to “shock and awe” which will take large numbers of lives – both Iraqi and American? Have all the alternatives to a war that will take tens of thousands of lives, undermine the effectiveness of the United Nations, and guarantee decades of increased global terrorism been pursued? We believe efforts towards preserving peace have not been made as aggressively as preparations towards waging war. We believe that there are alternatives to war that should be explored:
(Really excellent itemized list follows.)

http://www.coc.org/resources/articles/display.html?ID=400

Contrary to such simplistic thinking, not everyone here is a pacifist, but take a look at the established principles of a "just war" and look at how many of them the U.S. violated in attacking Iraq. Then, I think you will have answered your question.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[prolesunited]

20. Whoops!

Didn't mean to post three times and I obviously screwed up the HTML but I can't go back and edit cause it says time expired. Sorry.

[Darranar]

22. If you're getting error messages...

so are many others. Don't worry.

[prolesunited]

23. Unfortunately

I read EarlG's message about not hitting post multiple times after I already had done it.:+

[Darranar]

26. Happened to me, too...

don't worry. Dupes are everywhere now in GD.

[bigwoody]

24. When it's so important that the children of the warmongerers are among

the first to fight. Although that would be the right way, I realize that's just not going to happen. The pussies we now call chickenhawks are really just overcompensating for their inner guilt. It's easier for them to sound like a man with their mouths in middle age, than it was to step up in their youths(when it really counted). And that boys and girls is what being a being a repug chickenhawk is truly ALL about.:puke:

[ulysses]

27. rarely.

Not "never", but rarely. The case can be made for WWII, although one can't help but wonder about Chamberlain's diplomatic idiocy at Munich and before, or the French insistence on reparations payments for WWI which helped pave the way for the rise of the Nazis.

Hindsight being 20/20, of course...

[DemocratSinceBirth]

28. Wars That Were Just Causes

The Revolutionary War

The Civil War

WW2

Korea

Gulf War 1

[Darranar]

29. What about the War of 1812?

n/t

[wuushew]

30. War of 1812 was a landgrab.....

In reality, it was not so much the infringement of neutral rights that occasioned the actual outbreak of hostilities as the desire of the frontiersmen for free land, which could only be obtained at the expense of the Native Americans and the British. Moreover, the West suspected the British, with some justification, of attempting to prevent American expansion and of encouraging and arming the Native Americans. Matters came to a head after the battle of Tippecanoe (1811); the radical Western group believed that the British had supported the Native American confederacy, and they dreamed of expelling the British from Canada. Their militancy was supported by Southerners who wished to obtain West Florida from the Spanish (allies of Great Britain). Among the prominent “war hawks” in the 12th Congress were Henry Clay , John C. Calhoun , Langdon Cheves , Felix Grundy , Peter Porter, and others, who managed to override the opposition of John Randolph and of the moderates.

http://www.encyclopedia.com/html/section/War1812_CausesoftheWar.asp

[DemocratSinceBirth]

32. If The War Of 1812 Was Fought

over freedom of the sea than I support it....


I subscribe to the Just War theory as a previous poster cited.

[imhotep]

31. NEVER

violence never stops violence.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

35. It Stopped

Hitler

Tojo


and


Mussolini

[Leftist78]

34. direct attack only

or REAL threat to world peace i.e. WWII

[DemocratSinceBirth]

36. How About

Rwanda


Somalia


Kosovo


I believe in sovereignty but I don't believe it's broad enough to include genocide.

[Fleshdancer]

37. When our country is attacked

I believe we have the right to protect ourselves. When our allies are being attacked, I think we have an obligation to help if we are needed.

Even in the situations mentioned above however, war should be the very last option and we should never go into a war as lightly and as carelessly as we did in Iraq.

[MaverickX]

38. Define war..

Do you mean any and all use of military force? If so, then saying we must wait until we're attacked to go to war is silly. I'd also support the use of military force in situations involving genocide in other nations. I don't see why invading another nation is necessarily immoral or illegal.

[wuushew]

39. pretty much everything is war

Main Entry: 1war
Pronunciation: 'wor
Function: noun
Usage: often attributive
Etymology: Middle English werre, from Old North French, of Germanic origin; akin to Old High German werra strife; akin to Old High German werran to confuse
Date: 12th century
1 a (1) : a state of usually open and declared armed hostile conflict between states or nations (2) : a period of such armed conflict (3) : STATE OF WAR b : the art or science of warfare c (1) obsolete : weapons and equipment for war (2) archaic : soldiers armed and equipped for war
2 a : a state of hostility, conflict, or antagonism b : a struggle or competition between opposing forces or for a particular end <a class war> <a war against disease> c : VARIANCE, ODDS 3
- war·less /-l&s/ adjective