Just War Theory?

Question

In my Ethics class we are talking about the Just War Theory and the war in Iraq. The theory says: If a war can be fought and less evil ensues than what we could expect if we didn't fight the war, then the war is just.

If we apply this to the war in Iraq, do you think we violated this theory, the rule of proportionality? I was just curious for other opinions vs the opinions of my classmates.

Answer 1

Keep everything in percpective.
Iraq is a battle in a much larger war. The just war theory should not be used to battles. The war is with terrorism, terrorist states, and other nations who support them.

The end game for us, the US, is to reduce the effects, and likleyhood of terror is the US, its allies, and nations we have battles with. Eliminating terror is not possible, but reducing or making it an inaffective tool is. This is what the just war theory needs to be applied to, not soley Iraq.

Currently in Iraq, we have the attention of many of our enemies and causing them to focus most of their energy in Iraq and Afghanistan, but not all of it as Algeria proves. This is in the favor of the US and our allies. 1. Attacks on domestic soil are not as easily done, due to effor in the Mid-East, Intel gathering there, and a closer force. This makes the people reasonbly safer considering the alternative. 2. Though many in these places support our enemy, not all do. Our enemy is now forced to make many attacks in there home. This is taking its toll on there support. The terrorist are loosing support with more and more attacks that kill civilians. This again works in our favor. 3. We now have a large military presence on two borders of the largest current terror state Iran, and on the eastern border of a second Syria. This makes open support for them much more difficult than before, and limits but does not eliminate other "no name" support.

The End Game will determine if the theory is just. This cannot easily be applied during a war since the history and reprocussions are still be made. I

Answer 2

Well it's hard to know until it all works out, right?

On the face of it right now, it does not seem to be a just war, as we have unleashed violent forces that were kept in check by Saddam.

Also, we face a LONG war in Iraq, perhaps another 10 years. Will this "surge" prove temporary in benefits? Is the surge really a "benefit" or rather just a lessening of continued suffering?

In other words, could we say that finding only 25 dead bodies on the streets of Iraq each morning is better than 100?

Also, is it good or evil to have armed and trained the various factions? Might they not turn weapons on each other if they cannot find political accommodation?

One could argue that leaving Iraq will cause more suffering than staying does, so that is "good". But if invading starting the problem, how can the war be ultimately "good"?

In other words, how can one be morally rewarded for solving a problem one started in the first place? Wouldn't complete restitution to the Iraqi people be necessary, and prosecution of the people who started this war on behalf of America?

Answer 3

Just, yes. Proportional...who gives a rats rear.

This area of the world has been at a slow boil since European Jews began to PURCHASE land from the Ottoman owners in what is now Israel in the early 1900's. The terrorist activities date back to the early 1920's.

Over time it has escalated to what we see now.

History has overwhelmingly proved that:

1. Democratically run countries TEND to be peaceful in dealings with their neighbors.
2. Dictatorships TEND to invade their neighbors. Ref. Nazi Germany, Soviet Union, Iraq/Iran war, Iraq invading Kuwait, The October Wars 1973, The 6 Day War and on and on.
3. Sending them aid and cash changes NOTHING.
4. Arming them changes NOTHING. They can't even wipe each other out.

I see this as the last chance for the region before the US, EU, Russia and China just get tired of the kiddies and crush them using REAL warfare...most likely against each other, in the Middle East.

SSG US Army 73-82
Painting vehicles desert camo, in Germany, in 1974. Not much desert in Germany!!!

Answer 4

The concept of a "Just War Theory" is ludicrous. In order to evaluate this as you would like, one must know both outcomes. Since war and no war are mutually exclusive situations it is quite impossible to call either situation "Just".

I have said before and I will again: Normal people, the man and woman on the street, are better off ignorant of two things.
1. How sausage is made.
2. How war is waged.

War is for professionals. We are professionals ready to sacrifice our very life. That man and woman on the street can't imagine what that means.

Answer 5

i dont know if id apply a rule about evil to anything, but if you did apply it to iraq, than i would say that "evil" hasnt declined or increased. just an old "evil" being replaced by a new "evil". unless by evil you me offerings of sacrifice to satan himself, and then ofcourse. everyone knows that washington was designed to look like an upside down broken pentacle going into a fallen broken cross. just look at mapquest and zoom in on the whitehouse. maybe if we had found the active weapons programs, then we could justify the "evil" that ensued our own military.

Answer 6

There is no just war. And why Iran? I didn't see anyone rushing to Bosnia in a hurry or the Central African Republic where the real atrocities are going on. No oil you see.

Answer 7

No, because although the US forces were smaller in size to the Iraqi military, US technology was about 75 years superior. Bush broke the just war theory

Answer 8

I think 500 canisters of mustard gas are more than enough justification for our invasion. Saddam must have used up his nerve gas against the Kurds and Iranians. Stopping that slaughter was important to the only remaining superpower in the world.

Answer 9

Well okay, If you want to try to quantify real world actions with childish notions of justification and "evil" then I guess so. How the united states can take out one of the most brutal dictators in recent history and still be labeled "the bad guy" is so ******* beyond me I can't fathom it.

Answer 10

No, war is never JUST. Just assassinate the leaders. Only the rulers LOVE war they don't fight it. People get so hyped by the media / politicians to hate and kill people they do not even know.

Hey Joe T - Your answer is GREAT.