M3A1

.docx

School

Excelsior University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

301

Subject

Political Science

Date

Apr 3, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by Unionized3usa

JUST WAR THEORY ANALYSIS BNC 301 28 January 2024 David U Nieves Professor Ramzy Noel 1

JUST WAR THEORY ANALYSIS There are many political and ethical views when it comes to observing and analyzing the principles of war. People have often argued the dilemma on what constitutes the killing of another human being; for the greater good, the survival of a race, the subjective views of good and evil, or maybe the ideologies of power. Nevertheless, the beliefs of the individual belong to him and him alone. Historians and philosophers have analyzed the causes of war and the mentality of opponents throughout time, and British philosopher Bertrand Russell best known as a campaigner for peace and as a popular writer on social, political, and moral subjects has been attributed to the statement "War does not determine who is right only who is left”. Many interpreters determine this to be a political standpoint to define a “winner” in war. While others have felt there is no winner in war, only lives lost under the scrutiny of power that may not have been just to begin with. At what point does concern for a nation become paranoia? Political leaders have lied time and time again under the social pressures as a means for sustaining safety on the global stage. Jus ad Bello, translated into the right to wage war focuses on categorical principles under the pre-war function which allows for nations to begin military pre-mobilizations in preparation for war. Legitimacy for war will be based on the notion of a leader who has realized that it is incumbent of him to act in a way in which the future of his people will be safeguarded despite their understanding of his decision, and if persuasion through misled confusion is the means to an end, then emotional disorientation of the people should be considered just. 2

JUST WAR THEORY ANALYSIS Within law enforcement, the doctrine of qualified immunity allows for its members to perform their duties without the dangers of being held liable for actions taken as long as constitutional rights are not violated (NCSL, 2021). Inherently, personnel on many different levels of government, within the military, and elsewhere understand that making a decision, despite being a bad one would imply principles of leadership, as opposed no decision which would ultimately lead to failure. Believing in principles such as these allow leaders to make war commencement choices which outweigh disgruntled activist which might disagree with their ethical choices, although future interaction with the media and public might lead to concerns for issues like re-elections, such as those for upcoming runner for president Donald Trump and his personal predicaments within the last few years between him and the law. The Geneva conventions and the Hague conventions, both adopted with consideration for the conduct of war when analyzing the humane perspective, but what people at time fail to realize is, the irrational thinking of an opponent who believes in neither. In Saint-Augustine’s Just-War Theory, principles covering just cause, right intentions and the overall expression of jus ad bellum (2018), are ideals ignored by opponents which we face in today’s modern battlefield. Standards of war, pre, mid, and post are essential for maintaining ethical and moral standards in the eyes of unified nations who operate on a joint level to eliminate tyranny through war initiations. The U.S. has had primary involvement in wartime over the last 50 years with foreign nations who oppose western beliefs, and while the leader of the free world, and face on the global stage, the level of scrutiny and fear among domestic and foreign partners are always a 3

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help