Download file to see previous pages...
But humanists differ with such suppositions, stating that it is our moral obligation to use our reasoning mental faculties and intelligence to deliberate on war and overpower such natural instincts. Thus in the event of emergence of war, we ought to explore non-violent interventions (Norman, 2007, pp.1-5).
Peaceful solutions are not often simple to arrive at or put into force, as the past record of the United Nations suggests. However, human beings should be committed in supporting the UN’s peaceful efforts towards resolving conflicts among states. A significant number of humanists, such as Betrand Russell, have come out to vehemently oppose the use and manufacture of weapons of mass destruction. Today’s religion is absurd since it is supportive of violent means of resolving differences and injustices (Norman, 2007, pp.1-5).
Religion should never be a justification for participating in war. Non-religious individuals are quick to highlight the many wars that have been waged for centuries owing to religious differences. These are ridiculous reasons for taking away other people’s lives. They also condemn the role that world’s major religions play regularly in promoting war. Liberal democracies have a good overall reputation when it comes to violence. In fact, most liberal democracies will be remembered in the annals of history as having an excellent record for not igniting or promoting wars (Norman, 2007, pp.1-5).
Today’s religions have deviated from seeking faith and purity, and instead become entangled in activities geared towards promoting war. In the past, Christians expressed reservations towards participating in military activities. Quite a negligible fraction of Christians today root for the commandment ‘Thou shalt not kill’. Equally, they cite Jesus’s advice to turn the other cheek and not and not resist evil, as a guideline for pacification. But when Christianity
...Download file to see next pagesRead More
This means that the military cannot live and operate in isolation but then should have all its operations in the interest of the nigger society. One issue of such importance to society about the work and operations of the military is Just War. Content According to the BBC Ethics Guide (2011), “A war is only just if it is fought for a reason that is justified, and that carries sufficient moral weight.” Just War goes beyond just a military practice to be encompassed as a theory.
Orend defines war as intentional, actual, and widespread-armed strife between antagonistic political communities. The war in the views of Orend does cover intercommunity, robbery or terrorism fights. However, many cases of war have been witnessed in many nations (a group of people sharing similar beliefs).
This paper aims to examine whether or not there is an existence of a just war. The Nature of War Regan (1996, p.3) stated that war was natural part of life during the Greek times, and that they intensify “self- interest.” “Right reason” was also said to be one of the “Moral Norm of War” (Regan, 1996, p.10).
It is widely agreed upon that a nuclear war, if it happens, would produce this result. The threat that stronger nations pose to the sovereignty of smaller nations is also one of the greatest problems that faces mankind at this point of time in history. For the purpose of acquiring resources and also for the age-old purpose of conversions, countries may turn loose aggression on countries that may be unable to defend themselves from such an onslaught.
The matter of AEGON moving into UK was a significant one and this needed to be handled differently than it was being pursued within the United States and Netherlands. The most basic decision that the leaders had to make was on finding out the right environment in which they had to operate their business within.
Effects of The Hundred Years War on Military Traditions.
Allmand further argues, “In France and England, it was the breakdown of the historic feudal order, no longer able to meet the demands of changing times, and its gradual replacement by an order of nations increasingly aware of their growing national characteristics.”(7)
Theories relating to just war have always tried distinguish between the right and wrong in these power games. The terminological conclusions of this distinction are the terms ‘just war’ and ‘terrorism’. “Terrorism is the random killing of innocent people, in the hope of creating pervasive fear” (Walzer, 2006).
The strict conditions for legitimate defense by military force require rigorous consideration. The gravity of such a decision makes it subject to rigorous conditions of moral legitimacy. At one and the same time:
the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain; all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective; there must be serious prospects of success; the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated.
Out of all the wars which took place in this century, the Second World War is considered to be the only occasion where one side of the conflict could be justified as following the criteria required for fighting a 'Just war'. The World war two was a global war of all the major military nations including the super powers.
The author of the text emphasizes that "Just War" involves extermination of numerous people especially those not involved whereas the global states lightly assume those affected were only untargeted casualties. The author also believes, a remedy ought to give both warring states a neutral ground.
3 Pages(750 words)Essay
GOT A TRICKY QUESTION? RECEIVE AN ANSWER FROM STUDENTS LIKE YOU!
Let us find you another Essay on topic No war in the modern world can possibly be just. Discuss for FREE!