Can war ever be justified? Essay

This question is not that easy to answer. Many philosophers, politicians or just ordinary people in the past and in the benefaction try to come up with an answer, just now there is no simple answer to this question such(prenominal) as yes or no. The answer depends on an individual. few people like Ruth Heing adduce _Countries went to fight because they believed that they could achieve more through state of contendf atomic number 18 than by a diplomatic negotiation_. Some people like Bo Bennett regulate _Diplomacy is more than saying or doing the correctly things at the proficient time, it is avoiding saying or doing the wrong things at any time._War brings nothing to the acres but damage and destruction. Government is not the exclusively one who is affected by the war. War takes away lives of so many desolate people. More than 1068 000 people died in the battle of Somme. The weaponry is not cheap, millions atomic number 18 senseless on them. In 1898 when Kaiser Wilhelm II announced his bearing to built a powerful German navy, Britain increase first class war ship Dreadnought against Germans. They spent millions on building the ship, instead of using up the money on the ship construction it would be more effective to spend money on more sociable issues. Than the conflict between Germany and Britain would agree been avoided and at the same time some social needs would be satisfied as well.When it comes to self defense, war is just necessary. The reason why gallium still exists today is because when Turkey invaded Georgia in 10th, 11th century Georgia was constrained to patronise its self. Georgia wasnt the one who started the conflict. If Georgia would not have defended itself from the invaders (who were mostly from Muslim countries), today the country would have been a part of turkey or separate neighboring country. War can be necessary in order to get independency or freedom for exampleThere is no short answer to the question if the war c an ever be justified it depends on the post in which the country is in and it depends on the individual, how does a person view the affects of the war on the country. Everything in the world has both positive and negative aspects including War.Can war ever be justified? riseWar is an inevitable part of the history of tender-heartedkind. Unlike natural happenings, war is an action of people inflicted of other people. This issue has raised ethical problems, which are still problematic till today. War is by earthy sense evil, but can it ever be less evil? There are a number of varying options when discussing the issue of a excusable war. Some people reason that war is always justifiable magic spell others argue that it can never be. Some maintain that due to human conditions, war is inevitable. Can it ever be honorablely justifiable to use force so as to preserve values within a society such as justice, peace and freedom? The Pacifists argue that war is never morally justifies , while others argue that war at times is justifiable, and therefore they assign what one may call the just war tradition.The just war tradition represents a fund of practical moral insight based on a ringion on real problems as these have occurred in different historical contexts. The moral insights and practices that make up the tradition reflect the judgments and experience of people coming from a wide range of cultural institutions. Unjustly causing disparage to someone is never justified, and is referred to as an absolute moral pledge. An absolute moral obligation therefore refers to an obligation which has priority over all other moral obligations. On the other hand, to inflict harm which may or may not be justified can be referred to as prima facie moral obligation.A prima facie moral obligation is an obligation which has a strong moral reason back up it. However such obligation may be overridden under special circumstances, like self-defense. Therefore it is ethically correct to harm someone else in order to protect yourself and others. The just war tradition provides triad fundamental moral reminders. The use of force is sometimes necessary to preserve values that would otherwise be lost. Any resort to force and the application to forceful meaning have to be subjected to an intentionality of justification and restraint, and the means and techniques of war should serve the legitimate moral aims of the employment force. Can war be ethically justifiable? Two sets of rules have been developed to assess when choosing violence can be justified, as well as to set limits on the amount of force. These two sets of rules are referred to as jus ad bellum, which is the right to war, and jus in Bello, which is the right in war. Jus ad bellum refers to whether theoption to use force in a particular situation is justified, while jus in Bello refers to whether the type of force is to be justified. There are conditions in both jus ad bellum and in jus in Bello . The conditions in jus in Bello are proportionality of specific tactics and the immunity of non-combatants.The killing of innocent people during war is a criminal and who do it will be punished. The conditions in jus ad bellum are that there must(prenominal) be a legitimate authority and the need for a declaration of war (from the legitimate authority itself). There have to be a Just Cause, for example to defend human life no one can start a war without a reason. In a just war there have to be right intentions. One can kill others to bump them from attacking his country. There have to be reasonable hope of success you only declare a war with the hope of winning. Courage is to refuse to obey orders which are inhumane and to know when you need to parry (surrender). War has to be the last resort and one has to try and avoid it when possible. The last but not least is proportionality of the whole enterprise. There is the need to calculate the beneficial and harmful results. There h ave to be more positive results than negative ones. Thomas Aquinas held that a war can only be justified if three conditions are satisfied.The war must be legally declared by a public authority that is legitimately authorized to commit a people to war the war must be declared by someone who can be entrusted with the care of the common keen and a legal authority to declare a war. The war must be pursued for a morally just cause, like self-defense or to take something which is yours back it isnt right to betroth in a war against a nation that has do nothing to deserve it. Those who are meshed in fighting a war must have a rightful intention they must intend only to achieve the just end and must not be provoked. Some conditions are added to those of Aquinas by those who use the just war theory to evaluate the morality of war and of the weapons of war.They added that the war must be fought only as a last resort so if there is some other way of achieving ones just end, the war will not be just. There must be a reasonable hope of success. The war must be aimed to produce more reliable than harm, and it is wrong to use methods of warfare that cause more injuries and deaths than necessary. Therefore as to conclude, one must say that war has its rules and they should be followed. To declare a war one must have the right intention and a reasonable hope of success, and it must be fought only whennothing else can be done to achieve the results desired.