• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

"Justice and War are incompatible". Discuss War is defined as armed conflict between two or more groups. The purpose of war is to resolve conflict.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

"Justice and War are incompatible". Discuss War is defined as armed conflict between two or more groups. The purpose of war is to resolve conflict. We see from Richard Norman that war by its very nature is problematic because it involves activities, which are normally thought deeply wrong. For example, the deliberate maiming and killing of other human beings. The main concern with any type of war is whether it can be justified. Some people may say war can never be justified because it goes against values we humans should hold, such as the preservation of human life. These people may include pacifists who believe in the sanctity of life. Other people may believe war can be justified if the just war criteria are met. Patriots may believe war can be justified because we have a duty to fight for our country and protect out neighbour. Some people may believe justice and war are incompatible because the intentional killing of another human being can never be seen as a justified act. Pacifists believe all fighting is wrong and that there are more creative ways to resolve conflict such as boycotts, sit-ins and strikes. ...read more.

Middle

Jesus did not use violence at his arrest in self-defence. So war and justice are incompatible because we should love our enemy and we are not loving them by killing them. However others and myself may disagree and believe justice and war are compatible especially in the case of self-defence. Elizabeth Anscombe argues pacifism is mistaken because it denies a person of self-defence and places unacceptable and extra-ordinary limits on an individual's rights. It is also dangerous because it encourages the belief that all killing is wrong and makes no distinction between legitimate and illegitimate killing or justified and unjustified killing. Louis Pojman asks what is a right if we do not have the right to defend it? Pacifists claim war and justice are incompatible because of Jesus' teaching of "turn the other cheek". However, it is one thing to offer your own cheek, but quite different to offer your neighbour's cheek. Also Jesus used violence to fight for what he thought was right. He fought for justice; therefore we see justice and war are compatible. For example, he used violence to challenge those who misused the temple as a place to make money. ...read more.

Conclusion

Only the force necessary to achieve the aim of war must be used. This rules out the use of nuclear weapons etc. Finally there must be discrimination over targets. Civilians must not be killed. Jus ad bellum considers when it is right to go to war. The war must have a just cause. Jus in bello considers how wars should be fought. This is very difficult to decide in our modern world because of the weapons available and the destruction they cause. Justice and war are compatible if the just war criteria are met and the principle of proportionality is implemented. Although we see this is difficult to meet in the modern world, especially because of the introduction of nuclear weapons as they cause mass destruction. In my opinion the use of modern weapons, which can cause devastation, can never be justified. This is because innocent civilians are killed and cities are usually bombed causing strain on resources, such as water. However, I do think justice and war are compatible in certain circumstances, such as an attempt to overthrow a dictator. In my opinion justice and war are compatible, but in modern society I do not think war can be justified because of the weapons used. ?? ?? ?? ?? Sehrish Saleemi ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level International History, 1945-1991 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level International History, 1945-1991 essays

  1. What is "Total War"? Discuss with reference to World War One and World War ...

    In 1941 Japan bombed Pearl Harbour, so USA joined the war. Almost every country was participating: Far East, USA, Europe etc. There was massive recruitment as more help was needed. The government introduced forced conscription. All the women were working in industries in order to keep the production going.

  2. Vietnam War.

    One of Diem's first acts was to announce that his government would refuse to hold reunification elections, on the grounds that the people of North Vietnam would not be free to express their will and because of the probability

  1. This graduation paper is about U.S. - Soviet relations in Cold War period. Our ...

    A month later Winston Churchill-with Truman at his side-responded at Fulton, Missouri, declaring that "from Stetting in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic, an iron curtain has descended across the [European] continent." Claiming that "God has willed" the United States and Britain to hold a monopoly over atomic weapons,

  2. The Prelude to the 1975 War and the Cairo Agreement.

    Large street battles also took place around the Murr tower where the Syrians had been dug in. In pitting his meagre force of a few thousand fighters against three divisions of the Syrian Army, Gemayel was taking a calculated gamble that Israel would come to his rescue and evict the Syrians.

  1. Must a defensible theory of the morality of war must integrate moral reasoning with ...

    community, but is there one single agent, in the international community, specified to perform the task of intervening?

  2. Cold War

    The Communists took over the Russian Government before World War II that foreshadowed conflict with the anti-Communist US. On one side of the battle was Joseph Stalin's Soviet Union and the countries of Eastern Europe that had fallen under his dictatorship.

  1. In what ways was the Pacific war a racist conflict?

    In typical Capra style, it used elements of the Japanese's own propaganda and discredited it. In this instance, the commentary in parts of the film was Japans own rhetoric of co-existence and co-prosperity, while the pictures showed the mutilated corpses of Chinese men, women, and children.

  2. Rationality, Educated Opinion and Peace

    Resting on his idea of the irrational public, Angell expounds on the war and why the public's choice to go to war is actually irrational. In his aptly named book, The Great Illusion, he puts forth a convincing argument on the futility of war on grounds of rationality and economic considerations.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work