ipl-logo

Just War Theory Essay

1068 Words5 Pages

The just war theory provides us two basic conditions that make it permissible to start or partake in a war justly. The first condition is the “jus ad bellum,” which clarifies when it's just for a state to go to war. The second condition is the “jus in bello” which also elaborates on how soldiers can fight a war justly. The moral responsibilities and constraints of soldiers are stated under these two conditions. Constraints such as the avoidance for a soldier to intentionally harm a civilian is one of the basic principles which combatants from both sides of the war are expected to obey. Since, Jus in bello provides equal responsibilities and constraints for soldiers fighting on both (just and unjust) side of the war, under these circumstances, …show more content…

Soldiers can fight an unjust war justly if they obey Jus in bello, only on the grounds of moral equality amongst all soldiers. Jus in bello prevent civilians from being killed, and the moral equality of soldiers also prevent soldiers in captive to be treated as criminals. If these two things are obeyed, regardless of what side you’re fighting for, your war is being fought justly. Attacking enemy soldiers is permissible because of given consent from both sides. By becoming a soldier, you give your right away not to be attacked, under this circumstance a valid consent is given, therefore it's morally accepted to attack enemy soldiers during a war. An example of someone who fought an unjust war justly is General Rommel. A Nazi general who burned an execute order from the president to avoid executing soldiers in captive. Even though some may question his participation in the war in the first place, and also argue since he’s fighting for the wrong side there is no justification whatsoever for his actions, I will answer all these questions with my arguments above, which strips away any kind of responsibility from him in partaking in the war. Therefore, his actions can only be judged by what he does during the

Show More
Related
484 Words | 2 Pages

But is it enough? I also appreciate that through the years the just war theory has been expanded to include new parameters for methods and reasoning among other points (p. 143-4). But is it enough? 2) A major dilemma in war is the

Read More
1109 Words | 5 Pages

If I Die in a Combat Zone, depicts a soldier’s internal battle whether to enter the war or to escape, once the soldier is in the army, the book tells of his experience in Vietnam. Tim O’Brien believes the war in Vietnam is unethical and unjust through his experience upon being drafted, depictions of the battlefields, and how fellow soldiers acted. Tim O’Brien felt as if the war was unethical and unjust upon being drafted into the army. O’Brien attends basic training and finds out at the end, that he and a few others will become foot soldiers (pg. 56). This was what O’Brien had feared.

Read More
676 Words | 3 Pages

Thinking with a humane mindset it is more ethical to continue to fight a long and hard struggle, rather than slaughter many innocent

Read More
569 Words | 3 Pages

So we should most definitely not judge child soldiers on their violent acts, because to expect them to give their own life is far too

Read More
652 Words | 3 Pages

Citizens gain an understanding and appreciation for the sacrifices people in the military make. However, despite this… without the recognition of human rights, peace still can’t be achieved, whether its individual, cultural, or gender based rights. Even though forced labour is considered a violation of human rights, the practice of compulsory military service isn’t. The United Nations Commission on Human Rights only moved towards recognizing the right of individuals to object to military service in 1987.

Read More
727 Words | 3 Pages

A just war can can only begin to be considered soif the war itself was a last resort, waged by an actual authority, and was against a tangible wrongdoing.

Read More
821 Words | 4 Pages

They seem quick to jump on board to fight, when they feel it is right. His German family members “have fought duels not for cheap personal honour, but in the public interest-called out, for example, because they have protested against the scandalous behaviour of some superior officer of official” (Graves, 5). These actions directly align with Graves, and many others when World War One began. People were quick to enlist in the military, fighting in protest for their own beliefs, against the beliefs of others who they felt were wrong. Also, during World War One, most military members were fighting for the public interest of their country, not for self-honor, directly relating with the reasons Graves’s German family members fought duels.

Read More
849 Words | 4 Pages

Picture a kid who finds himself in a dangerous situation. He is backed into a corner by an attacker, and if he does not fight back, he will not be able to survive this interaction. If the boy were to kill that attacker, what punishment would he deserve? Some may say that the punishment for murder should always be death, but this statement can be seen otherwise. Based on the situation of the murder, some punishments may serve more justice than execution, the crime may have been committed in self-defense, or the criminal could have been reformed into a better person.

Read More
1104 Words | 5 Pages

They fought for the rights they felt were being stripped away from them. These soldiers had wrong and immoral views, but they would rather fight than concede to a different belief

Read More
705 Words | 3 Pages

Do you fight against members of your family? One could relate this situation to the idea of the grass being greener on the other side. If he fights for his home state and with his family he doesn’t have the risk on his conscience of killing family members, but on the other side he has his moral obligations to do right and justly. The question then becomes to whom are you going to be more loyal to? " As used in political discourse, the concept of loyalty occupies the ground between patriotism and obligation” (Sills 484).

Read More
502 Words | 3 Pages

In David Barno’s , “A New Moral Compact,” he stresses about our countries current military situation, which is all-volunteer. Barno has also served time in the military himself as a lieutenant general. He claims that the countries current dependence on the all-volunteer military, allows us to rush into war without thinking about the consequences first. Barno proposes the idea, “that every use of military force over 60 days would automatically trigger an annual draft lottery to call up 10,000 men and women” (p.20).This solution is useful but it is not useful enough because it targets sympathy from the people while he needs to target the president because the president can initiate a war without consent of the people or Congress.

Read More
1178 Words | 5 Pages

In the UNSC’s article 51, individual and collective self-defense can be authorized by the UNSC under the framework of collective security. However, genocide is never justifiable in the eyes of the UN. Perhaps the most distinguishing feature between war and genocide is the disproportionally ability of those involved to fight back. Within war there is a certain level of understanding that those engaging in the conflict will have an ability to engage in battle. However, historically in genocides the effected groups have had little to no ability to proportionately fight against their attackers.

Read More
1198 Words | 5 Pages

In the eyes of the law, this man is guilty and should be punished. However, is it right for that man to forget about his own conscience and fight in a war he does not see as a just one? Is it right to make him choose between forsaking his wows to the country and his moral responsibility to his conscience? It is my strong belief that even nowadays there are still some unjust laws.

Read More
442 Words | 2 Pages

In the movie Crimson Tide, we look to the question ethical decisions, and what someone would do when thrown into a situation that made them question themselves, and who they serve for. In this example, when serving in the United States Military, once a solider is given orders, that solider must follow the orders out and not to question them. The trust between the solider and the higher command giving orders is almost based on blind faith. The solider relies on the higher commands decision of protecting democracy, even if someone, or a lot of people are killed. Is it an ethical decision to follow a commander’s order even if it means killing mass numbers of innocent civilians?

Read More
1716 Words | 7 Pages

There are three parts of Just War theory, named different in English but common in Latin. “Just ad Bellum” part describes the conditions under which the use of military force is justified, “Jus in Bello” gives guidance how to conduct a war in an ethical manner and “Jus post Bellum” directs how to act in a transition to

Read More

More about Just War Theory Essay

Related Topics

Open Document