Innocents In War Time Essay

Wartime is something that we have seen to be somewhat inevitable in the world and a major part of our history. We have seen all throughout history how different nations, states, groups and even people go to war for feuds that they believe matter to them and to gain something from this whether that be land, power or anything else. But should innocent lives be lost when achieving this goal? I believe that the lives of those that are not involved with war should not be compromised and there is no justifiable reason to do so.
Some can argue that killing of innocents in war time is morally permissible for the greater good in a Utilitarian stand point because killing them is meant to be for a greater good of the nation, making the most utility. But what if their killings did not maximize utility?
It is important to point out that I am defining innocents to be those who have nothing to do with the
The Doctrine of Double effect stated that we should use evil for the means of good but you can, while bringing about good, cause evil as a side effect. This could be viewed as one must not cause harm, but could ultimately be causing harm when trying to do something good, basically prohibiting that result in something bad or wrong. If we shouldn't cause harm, then killing of innocents in war time is not permissible. The killing of innocents in fact tends to lead to the demoralization of the enemy. For example, in most cases, nations go to war as a result to something unjust and/or an attack where that be a terrorist attack or not; but how can we justify their wrong actions if we end up killing civilians? Also under the doctrine of double effect, German philosopher Immanuel Kant, adds that one should not use a person merely as means to achieve a goal. This would unjustified the means of using a person’s life in danger to achieve a goal, in part, alluding to an absolutist