Is the war on terrorsim just Essay

In this paper I argue that fight against terrorism is no scarce but some struggle deal be simply as long as it follows the supposition of a just contend. As old as early civilizations, contend compete a significant role in the semi governmental stability and state of warranter of the society. It has been a central feature of civilisation throughout recorded time. (Evans, 1). Although war is seen as violent and morally destructive, tranquillise it was considered as an effective vogue of accommodateing and even promoting civilization. It was also utilized by the major religions of this creative activity such as Islam and Christianity to spread their faith.In every war, we cant deny the fact that in that location is a political motive prat the heroic reason of its leaders. Being evil by nature, there be a kitty of arguments regarding the moral sentiment of war. According to La Vitta Cattolica, the flip is whether the nature of traditional war is dummy up appli cable with the modern one. Their concentrate is it is still the same when it comes to the extent of its fatality. They described it as a lethal contest, fed by hatred, physical violence is unleashed in all its brutality. (Elshtain, 108). Is war really for the benefit of people or is just another right smart of exploiting humanity?There is also a skepticism regarding the extent of its necessity. Nowadays, there are standards to fulfil if a country wants to engage in war. Although a term such as just war was derived from this war controversy, still justice is still a question. It is because the provisions of this just war opening is not fulfilled. Until now, we can say that there is no such war in our fib that fulfilled those provisions. Mean plot, war is also in the history of Christian church. When we look at the teachings of Christianity, we can say that it is against the ideas of Jesus Christ.As we read the gospel, it was clearly imposed by Christ that each of us should love one another even our enemy. As a weigh of fact, Nicolas I state that was is al ship track satanic to its origin. (Elshtain, 113). Even Christ himself mark off an example of being a promoter of peace. But later on, the said faith needs to adapt to the changing world and the result is the use of war to defend the faith. During the 4th and 5th century, Christians were obliged to do armed forces service. This policy was change during the middle ages but later on, the Church became mixed with crusades.(Elshtain, 113). Here we can see that war is really inevitable. Although war is inevitable, still a nation or state should do alterative ways to defend themselves. Even if the motive of engaging in war is great the casualties that it will cause to humanity is great. In previous wars, a lot of innocent lives were brutality killed. It will be sensible if those people were oppressors or enemy of the states but those people were ordinary citizens that needs to be protected. As said by Th ucydides, The strong do as they can while the weak cope with for what they must (Chomsky, 1).It is the strong forces church as political and military forces who initiated the war but sadly, the civilians who have nothing to do with their decisions suffer from its consequences. As a state it is the responsibility of the government to promote the well-being of its people by letting them experience political protective cover. One way of ensuring political security is through defending a state from abroad invaders. But it doesnt mean that war is the only option to defend one state. For me, war should be the last option of the state and obscure from selfish political reason the welfare of the people should be the master(prenominal) motive.When it comes to war against terrorism, I believe that it is not just because it doesnt turn over to just war theory. What is a just war? In a traditional sense, it denotes a specific body of moral doctrine set up in Christianity. (Evans, 2). It promoter that the faith that promotes peace love for enemies also pick out the use of war to secure the faith. In modern times, a just war means following certain ethical consideration forwards engaging in a war. In other words, actions are evaluated in terms of range of the patient ofredly consequence. (Chomsky, 7). It means that a just war should create a lesser physical and moral damage.It also means that engaging in a just war is like choosing the lesser evil. though within war there may be galore(postnominal) acts of heroism, just war theory cannot then, be said to glorify war or be blind of its moral horrors. (Evans, 10). Aside from that, just like other kinds of war, it involves overrefinement and interrogation of innocent civilians. One way of justifying the war against terrorism is the idea that it protects the people from fatal terrorist attacks. Nowadays, terrorist attacks which is most generally in a form of bombing kills a lot of innocent civilians. separate than that terrorist attacks can affect a nations economy that is why there are still doubts whether war against terrorism is really for people. Because the political stability of a states is also threatens by terrorist attacks, there is the possibility that the security of civilians is not the primary concern. Let us look at the reason of war theory and see whether the war against terrorism is a just war. First, the cause must be just and the justice of the cause is sufficiently great. Next, one must be confident that it will not offspring long term consequences longer than the status quo.Obviously, it should be the last rectify and moral standards should not be compromised. We can say that the first both conditions apply to the war against terrorism but the applications of the latter conditions were questionable. Surely this kind of war will cause long term psychological effectuate to the civilians involve. It can cause major trauma to the victims that can affect their workad ay lives even if the war is over. It is also obvious that moral standards were compromised because of the use of torture to gain information.There is also a debate regarding the moral aspect of torture. Indeed, information during war is a necessity for it can serve as a solution to win and end the war immediately. But the question is whether it is needed right here and now to win a feature battle. (May, 196). Form me, whether their information is helpful or necessary in winning the battle, torture is still a form of human rights violation. Indeed, war is not a good way of defending a state. Even if there are just wars, still it is very fatal and those innocent civilians were the common victims.But if there is no other option except war, it is reasonable as long as it promotes the welfare of the states and civilians.References Elshtain, J. (1992) Modern War and Christian Conscience. But was it provided?. La Civilitta Cattolica. New York. Evans, M. (2005). Just War theory A reappra isal. New York Palgraw Macmillan. May, L. (2007). War Crimes and Just War. New York Cambridge University Press. Chomsky, N. (2006). A Just War? Hardly. Retrieved January 9, 2007 from ZNPT Commentaries. Website http//www. zmag. org/sustiners/content/2006-05/zochomsky. cfm.