My question is about the morality of war?..?

Question

One of my favorite quotes is: WAR IS NOT A FAMILY VALUE!
I understand the need to defend from an enemy invasion.
But that is where I draw the line!
The so called (preventive wars are usually based on lies and they are evil!) I see many religious people are more prone to justify violence to anyone not in agreement with their belives!
Your comments please?

Answer 1

I pretty much agree with you. War should be avoided except when your country is actually under attack or if an attack is actually imminent. "Actually"--the operative word. In the case of Iraq Mr. Bush knew no attack was imminent but he lied in order to get his war approved. But suppose in 1941 intelligence had shown a Japanese fleet heading toward Pearl Harbor--it would have been totally justified not just to bomb that fleet, but to begin hostilities against the Japanese empire at that point. There is also such a thing (I think) as a justified intervention. President Clinton intervened in the ethnic slaughter in the former Yugoslavia to prevent a larger war from developing, rather like removing a cancer when it is small and presents no fatal results. It was a quick, surgical, well executed military campaign and it worked successfully precisely because it was 1) justified and necessary and 2) it was well planned--unlike this catastrophic Iraq war that Mr. Bush insisted on dragging our country into.

War should be avoided. Obviously. Killing people is utterly wrong. Besides that, it imposes a terrible financial cost, that is money that is needed for real needs which must go unmet. The US will be paying for Mr. Bush's War for generations. I suppose, for ever having been a defective enough country to let such a defective personality become leader, it deserves to pay that price. It would be nice if the price could be paid only by the people stupid enough to have voted for him, though.

Answer 2

Try watching on the works of St. Augustine, who had a alternatively complicated idea of the morality of warfare or the "simply warfare". The excellent illustration of morality of warfare is whilst a country is attacked through an additional country. The attacked country has just a few offerings: give up, become a member of with the aggressor, or combat again. Britain certainly adopted the "combat-again" choice in 1939 and that used to be a smart choice. Just consider of what could have occurred, had Britain now not stood up for the proper . .

Answer 3

War is a power struggle between Humans. War determines who will be in control. War Kills. War is the final act without diplomacy.

There will always be War when there is Fear, Greed, and Evil. However, in the future, War will be a primitive solution for our Defense against Terrorism.

Once Defense Technology is obtained at the highest level, no one will be able to harm another again. This will cause the Humans on this Earth to grow up and stop acting like little Children and actually take responsibility for Life and our Planet Earth. In the mean time brace yourself for War. Because we are still not learning our lesson. War is our destruction unless we make major changes.

If you look at Human History, you will see the destruction of many powerful civilizations for the very same reason. War causes War.

Answer 4

War is immoral, just self defense is moral(when attacked, self defense is not just moral is imperative). Lets face it no matter how people wants to displace guilt and say it as patriotism, a fact is a fact, murder is murder. Neither the attacker nor the defender really know what they are really fighting for, after they are deployed they just try to stay alive, killing each other for vague reasons as country and freedom, ask any soldier what were they thinking while being shoot at(not patriotism i reckon).
Then we have to face the ultimate fact; who were right? The answer is simple the winner(according to history), that doesn't make it more right nor just. Therefore just as not universal truth exists, no universal motive for war exists, and no one is right.
The question is how can you make war based on false truths and incomplete data? if you say that is to save people, you'll be killing people anyway(your enemies). Color, nationality, religion, it is all meaningless ****, if you kill one of their citizen is the same as killing on of you citizens, people are people.
War is just genocide.

My point is, as human beings do we care about "country" or "freedom", the answer is NO. We care about our loved ones, our friends and the places we live, therefore we fight for them.
How do you protect them by wreacking havoc in a country on the other side of the globe, from which you have vague data of weapons that you aren't even sure if they are pointed at you?
On the other side you have some direct attack or imminent(as in army already on the border) treat, then you make them dust.

Answer 5

I am not religious at all. I have been at war. War is a horrible thing,but sometimes a necessity. I opposed the invasion of Iraq,I literally protested in the streets,signed petitions,etc. I DO NOT think we should have invaded.That being said,people need to get realistic and quit harping about whose fault it was 6 years ago and concentrate on here and now.

Here and now,we ARE there,radical Islam has NOT said if we leave they will play nice,in fact,quite the opposite.I personally,am not willing to just leave a power vacuum to be filled with extremists who have vowed my country will be destroyed.If we leave,the entire region becomes Muslim,the oil supply dries up,and the economy collapses.
"no blood for oil"sounds real good in a knee jerk sort of way. In reality though,we can give "blood for oil" or we can starve for the lack of it. That's just reality. I AM NOT pro-war,but once we are in one. I am certainly pro-victory. Thumbs down me all you want. Idealism won't fix that mess,we must ensure the oil,get off of oil,or go down the trash heap of history. Whine all you want,without the oil,we will starve. We are totally dependent on it,like it or not

Answer 6

John Stuart Mill on War
War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.

John Stuart Mill, 1806-1873

what about Hitler.. what about Rawanda.. what about Darfur

Answer 7

Hard to trust governments these days. But in the end, what choice do we have if our country calls upon us- announcing a threat to freedom- at home or abroad?

Should we RISK being annihilated because we think the government is lying?

I hate the fact we even have to think this way... but the way I see it-- if everyone quit on going to war when called- our nation would quickly fall into the hands of people who envy our resources.

There is a time for war and a time for peace. Agression must be answered. To fail to answer it is immoral.

Answer 8

There will never be a time that I will willing take up a gun and shoot down a bunch of innocent soldiers who have done me nor anyone else wrong. What is their crime? Belonging to the wrong country? We don't choose where we are born. Plus, they are the enemies that we are called to love. I don't see how we can love our enemies and shoot them at the same time. What ever happened to forgiveness and turning the other cheek??

Answer 9

I can't see any morality in war - even in the barbaric biblical times. All wars of aggression are evil, no matter by what name called. It can only be excused when done in self defence.

Answer 10

War is a necessary evil, but certainly doesn't appeal to everyone.The judicial system also doesn't appeal to every one,more specifically does inclined to commit crimes.
Since we all have the right to exist,war is necessary to enforce that right.
If the USA doesn't take a stand against does
threatening our existence, who will?

That bull sh*** of turning the other cheek
is a justification for cowardice.