Aren't the only "just" wars ones on your own soil?

Answer 1

"You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war."

Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955), (attributed)

Answer 2

In a way, no. You never hear people use the term "just war" when fighting the war on their own soil. The term is only used by those who need to justify it. That doesn't mean there is no justification. It just means one is needed. The US hesitated a long time before going into WWII.

Answer 3

No. It is not a good idea to wait until it is too late. That's 1930s French thinking, and it didn't work out too well for them. If an operation on foreign soil could've prevented 9/11, I think most Americans would say it would've been a good thing.

Answer 4

no, i would much rather stop the enemy from getting to my soil. take them out on their own soil so i can protect my family. would you wait to engage in a fight until after someone had smashed you in the face with a beer bottle... or would you rather make a block and counter punch? but to be frank! war sucks no matter where they are.

Answer 5

The front room, the front porch, the front yard, the property boundary, the village limits.

The further we get from those the more precariously we have to conjure images from the imagination out of the pretense we have some common grounds for warring.

I care equally about what happens to individuals in, say, California or Florida, as I do about what happens to someone in Uganda or Malasia.

And I figure we have about the same level of common interests.

Answer 6

Your government has 'justified'the war in iraq, and kuwait or any other place you might mention. It has achieved this by lying to nrain dead people like most that have answered here.

We heard the same 'justification' for the viet nam war - better to fight them there before they come here- I recognised it for a lie then and I recognise the same lie now.

Saddam was no threat to the us, there were no terrorists in iraq so they find some other reason for it. In truth, this is a holy was, a modern crusade, initiated at the request of Israel.

You are right, the only just reason for war is self defence.

Answer 7

So you want to fight an urban ground war in your hometown? WOW, you sure are brave!! You want to see terrorists in the street raping and killing women and children? They don't have rules of engagement like the US does and if you think for one second that they are going to "play fair" you are sadly misled. Be thankful that there are plenty of brave men and women willing to volunteer to protect our country so you don't have to. Fight it in someone else's yard so they don't come into ours!!

War may not seem "just" to you but it is sometimes a necessary evil to protect our country.

Answer 8

According to your definition, the only "just" wars would be civil wars, since at least one side of the war is unjust in any other case, so there's really no logical basis for your argument.

Did France think it was unjust for the US to come save them in the 40s? Did the Kuwaitis think it was unjust for the US-led forces to come protect them in Desert Storm? No. Sometimes, "If you want peace, prepare for war."

Answer 9

Based on what? Insanity? I do not understand where you are going with this. Whether you agree with this one or not, was it "just" for us to go protect Kuwait from Saddam in Gulf War I?

Beau...At least you cited the Bible correctly, even if your interpretation is incorrect. It is not murder to kill in all circumstances...such as by accident, in self defense or in defense of others, etc. Wars can be, and often are, defense, as in Kuwait, France, etc.

Nemisis...according to you, Stopping Hitler was unjustified. Nobody was justified in stopping him unless he invaded them??? Is that what you are trying to say? Because it is EXACTLY WHAT YOU STATED!

Answer 10

Absolutely not! International law is very clear on this. A sovereign nation state always has the right to attack another when provoked. There is nothing that says a state cannot fight its enemies outside of its own borders.