Jonathan Granoff – “Nuclear Weapons, Ethics, Morals and Law”
Ron Paul – “Conscription: The Terrible Price of War”
Jonathan Granoff – “Peaace and Security”
War and Terrorism is perhaps one of the hottest topics in the U.S. The debate on whether a mosque should be built two blocks away from ground zero has refreshed people’s memory of the terrorist attack nine years ago. Many people in the U.S. believe that we are in a just war with the terrorists who threat the peace of the world. However, how many classifications can wars be categorized? What kind of war should be permissible? In my opinion, the existence of war is evil and should be limited to the minimum possible level.
First, I want to argue about the justice of a “just war”. A just war means it fits both jus ad bellum (the right to go to war) and jus in bello (the just conduct of war) (Boss, 575). Let me start analyzing from the jus ad bellum. As we know, war involves the use of armed violence between nations or between competing political factions to achieve a political purpose (Boss, 571). A war usually starts when two parties believe different thing. Namely, under many circumstances, both sides in a war believe themselves are just and the other side is evil. Even some countries try to start a war that is “unjust”, they will create a “just cause”. The Iraq War is an example. I remember in the movie “Jarhead” about 1990 Gulf War, there is a scene that the military leaders were showing the troops how just this war is by protecting Kuwait from Iraq’s invade, then a soldier whispered to another saying that this war is just for the oil. After failing to prove that Saddam Hussein possessed weapon, the Iraq War is widely considered as an unjust war based on economic purpose. However, how many times can we prove the just cause of a war? How can we prevent any organization from starting another “Iraq War” if we allow them to use just war as an excuse?
The second ingredient of a...