When Is War Justified?

[gael]

It seems that with the world becoming a kind of global community, terrorism will be the only way for people to get past global laws and declare a war on a country.
The standard 'rules' of war have become distorted.
I posted a thread once asking what people thought on the famous statement 'One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter'. I was looking for unbiased opions on it from a historical point of view. I posted it in the history forum i think. It died pretty quickly. (wrong forum probably)
War in the future is not going to be one nation against another, not with all the nukes about. Its going to be highly organised groups doing a lot of distruction, maybe oneday with a nuke.

Even if you topple regimes and govenments, these organisations can work independantly. This is the war of the future.
I think it is these extremist groups that will probably cause the next 'big one'. Nations will become frustrated in thier attemps to combat it, and will declare war in the only way they are sure of victory.
Then again this could be all doom and gloom alarmist bull. But just look what a few nutters in planes with a few knives have started.

 

[ApocalypseKurtz]

Interetsing thread, since we are discussing the same thing in one of my classes, Philosophy of War and Peace.

In my opinion the only legitimate way to go to war is self defense. A preemptive attack, because you believe the enemy is about to attack you, is not justified because you can NEVER be sure that you will be attacked. Look at the Cuban Missile Crisis. People who lived through it thought we were almost definitely goign to nuclear war, but it didn't happen. Diplomacy will solve things without violence.

 

[cgannon64]

Originally posted by ApocalypseKurtz
A preemptive attack, because you believe the enemy is about to attack you, is not justified because you can NEVER be sure that you will be attacked. Look at the Cuban Missile Crisis. People who lived through it thought we were almost definitely goign to nuclear war, but it didn't happen. Diplomacy will solve things without violence.

I did a paper on that this year. What I find very interesting is that pretty much everyone in the White House who knew about the crisis were pushing for a preemptive strike. What is scary is that the Russian leader in Cuba had the authority to use the missiles in case of invasion. Had the US decided the air strike followed by invasion was the better option, NYC or DC would probably be in ruins now.

thank god they didnt

 

[Pongui]

Most countries arm themselves for the same reason: they believe themselves threatened. The fact that other countries arm themselves verifies it. They need to be better armed than other countries, especially those other countries that are potently armed and therefore threatening. Escalation comes naturally. When the enemy trains with gas-masks, this is a bad sign, and means one must be ready to counter their use of gas with one's own gas, or with a small nuclear missile, to teach them a lesson.

I would not call Americans fools on account of their defense industry. Precious few Americans have any control over that, yet. If America were isolated from most of the world safely in the middle of an ocean, its defense industry would still make excuses for growth. This, of course, would not seem threatening to Americans.

Fortunately, most countries bravely face (and counter) the escalations of their enemies without actually initiating war. If it were not so, we'd all be warring to "defend" ourselves on many fronts against countries "defending" themselves against us.

So, no, Iraqis are not justified in initiating an attack to defend
themselves against an uncertain threat. No country is.

 

[GerrardCapashen]

Isn't America isolated from most of the world in between two oceans? Not that I feel that the U.S. should weaken its military, because we need the capability when push comes to shove, and it is also useful for protecting our allies (most of them don't spend a quarter as much of their budgets on defense as we do). The oceans just make the Navy that much more important and provide an additional line of defense. No one could transport enough tanks to invade the U.S. across the oceans even if there was no Navy to stop them.

About the poll, I voted option 2, but now that I look more closely, I also agree with option 4.

 

[Pongui]

I would not call Americans fools on account of their defense industry.

 

[MrPresident]

Self-defence, including pre-emptive strikes if necessary.

 

[Chairman Yang]

Originally posted by rmsharpe
Offensive wars to regain lost territory, though it sounds identical to me to fighting when you've been attacked (e.g., America in the Phillipines, Britain in the Falklands, etc.)

So it would be justified for the british to reclaim their lost territory in the new world?

 

[CivCube]

Hey, where's the option for "only if the main objective is to eliminate a threat to the human race"?!

 

[G-Man]

War is justifiyable if the majority of people in a certain country want it. That's the only measurment I can think of. There's no such thing as a justifying a war because of it's cause. Each situation is different and involves too many emotions, goals, history, etc, and they're all different between each side (yes, including history).

 

[MrPresident]

So it would be justified for the british to reclaim their lost territory in the new world?

We tried that...remember something called the revolutionary wars? (also known by some fringe lunatics as the war for independence)

 

[Panda]

Offensive wars to regain lost territory

Von der Maas bis an die Memel
Von dem Etsch bis an den Belt

Los! Los!

:tank: :tank: :tank:

 

[ApocalypseKurtz]

Originally posted by cgannon64


I did a paper on that this year. What I find very interesting is that pretty much everyone in the White House who knew about the crisis were pushing for a preemptive strike. What is scary is that the Russian leader in Cuba had the authority to use the missiles in case of invasion. Had the US decided the air strike followed by invasion was the better option, NYC or DC would probably be in ruins now.

thank god they didnt

Right. Very true, and very scary.

 

[TrailblazingScot]

It is right when "Big Brother" says it is right.


Here comes a candle to light you to bed, here comes a chopper to chop off your head!!!

 

[Obssesed Nuker]

Lets not forgoet the option of: Nuclear War too wipe all of humanity is justifible