History tells us that almost every strong nation in this world has at least, tried to stamp its dominance over a weaker country. This was first shown by the early world powers of Spain and Portugal, who conquered among themselves several territories for their utmost conquest and control. Another great aggression of weaker states was that of Germany, Italy and Japan, which led to the Second World War. Now, we have the case of the United States and Britain waging an all-out war against Iraq. These things bring us to the following questions: is there morality in all these wars of aggression? Did these powerful countries have the justifiable reason to declare war and conquer the weaker nations? .
Answering these questions would mean analyzing the reasons why these superpowers engaged in war. To this, the immediate response of these nations is that they need to do so inorder to uphold peace in the world, promote justice & equality, save the citizens of the weaker state from oppression & suffering and seek social order. These reasons are merely not enough to convince the rest of the world that war is justifiable. Scholars and even the common people believe that these superpowers go to war because of the very basic need of every nation to survive.
But, what really is meant by the essential need for survival? It means that in this world of limited resources and at the same time overflowing needs of the people, only a limited number of nations can have access to the resources, thus we have this concept of competition to satisfy these needs, where only the strongest and the fittest survive and get the chance to enjoy them. Superpowers want to establish their hand over other nations to make sure that their respective citizens are secured of their needs, not only for the present but in the future as well. Another underlying and real reason superpowers go to war is to ascertain its military, political and economic dominance and show the world that they are a great and strong nation.
When asked about war some would allude to the Just War Theory. ... Only he can declare war. ... So for them the just war conditions only apply to aggressive wars. ... Walzer, and most modern just war theorists, speak of the one just cause for resorting to war being the resistance of aggression. Aggression, simply put, is unjustified and harmful violence. ...
These exceptions to America's isolationist policy were made mostly on the basis of morality. The Second World War was a turning point for America. Instead of this war being another exception to her habits, it opened the eyes of many the United States" leaders. ... President Woodrow Wilson reluctantly lead America into World War I after German U boats attacked Atlantic merchant shipping and their audacious aggression symbolized by the Zimmerman Telegram sent to Mexico. ... If Hitler had not declared war on the United States, President Franklin Roosevelt should have declared war on Germ...
He argues that it can in some cases when measured against just war theory. Just war theory sets moral limits on the waging of war while justifying its legitimacy. ... On one end of the spectrum one can place those political leaders who undertake aggression, followed by soldiers, contributors to the war, supporters, and on the other end nonsupporters. ... The morality of the principle of double effect comes into question, and rightly so if we use just war theory as a standard. ... Finally it can be argued that most wars do not satisfy just war requirements, especially if one dismisses the m...
What kind of aggression can spur on to seizing hostages and exploding dwelling houses? At least when a nation is at war "rules of the game" are declared and it is prepared to withstand the enemy. ... Years or even centuries of social injustice, lack of political rights and freedom, the constant state of war - can that all contribute to daily growing anger and resentment in their hearts? ... I believe the verdict is not at all consolatory: there are nations that value innocent lives, therefore others with evil in their hearts will unfortunately try to use this morality as leverage in a wicked ...
Under the "Just War Theory," a conflict is deemed unjust if one of the jus ad bellum (the right to go to war) and in jus bello (the right to conduct war) is not met. ... When a democratic nation goes to war, Just War Theory is used in the political process in order to gain support for the justification of war. ... Due to this democratic function, a combatant's morality cannot be questioned, because under ad bellum they cannot question their decision to go to war. ... McMahan describes the prima facie as evidence to why the war would be unjust. Ceulemans skims over the example of Kosovo in...
Following Israeli aggression on Egypt during Gamal Abdel Nasser's regime Arab world imposed an oil embargo on western countries on the pretext that Israel had attacked a Muslim country and the West aided her. ... Knowledge about religion means knowledge of behavioral pattern and code of morality of people. If they are known, policies contradicting popular morality can be averted. ... Before Arab-Israeli wars, Lebanon was the only Christian majority country in the Middle East. But after the wars, Muslim migrants poured in and turned Christians into minority. ...
In this paper, I shall argue that violence is not the best reaction to aggression. ... The violence that Bond condemns is not violence in general but specifically social injustice and war. ... Indeed, people have good intentions but their means to achieve them are often based on violence and thus lead to war. ... (III.ii.92) Your law always does more harm than crime, and your morality is a form of violence" (III.iii.99). ... We all react violently to aggression. ...
He argues that it can in some cases when measured against just war theory. Just war theory sets moral limits on the waging of war while justifying its legitimacy. ... On one end of the spectrum one can place those political leaders who undertake aggression, followed by soldiers, contributors to the war, supporters, and on the other end nonsupporters. ... The morality of the principle of double effect comes into question, and rightly so if we use just war theory as a standard. ... Finally it can be argued that most wars do not satisfy just war requirements, especially if one dismisses the m...
We have addressed this problem over centuries of questions and debates some of which have caused wars and famines. ... Today, the world has succumbed to chaos, we seem to have this insatiable propensity to war, Ebola is spreading and killing thousands, ISIS is taking hold and thousands more are being martyred, how can one think that humanity is anything but evil at heart? ... It was observed that the variation in the levels of oxytocin create a more and/or less conducive physiological environment to act with more aggression and become less empathetic. ... Even people who are more predispose...
