Please Read - Theory of War Survey

[Micaelis Rex]

I am writing a paper on the theory of war, and would really appreciate your help. All you have to do is answer the four questions below. To participate, just reply to this post with your answer to each of these four questions.

1.) What country do you live in?

2.) Which of the following positions most closely echos your own belief about when war should be waged?

• Position A I believe that the most important reason for a country to consider in deciding whether or not to go to war should be whether or not the war will provide a net benefit to their own citizens.
• Position B I believe that the most important reason for a country to consider in deciding whether or not to go to war should be whether the war is morally justifyable or not.
• Position C I believe that since it is never morally right for a country to go to war, countries never should go to war.

3.) Overall, do you believe that the reasons that the US government gave for fighting its War on Terror were sufficient enough causes to go to war?

4.) Overall, do you believe that the execution of the War on Terror has reflected the reasons that the US Government gave for fighting it?

Thank you very much for participating in my survey!
Micaelis Rex

[Dis]

Re: Please Read - Theory of War Survey

Originally posted by Micaelis Rex
I am writing a paper on the theory of war, and would really appreciate your help. All you have to do is answer the four questions below. To participate, just reply to this post with your answer to each of these four questions.

1.) What country do you live in? United States of America

2.) Which of the following positions most closely echos your own belief about when war should be waged?

• Position A I believe that countries should only go to war when doing so would produce a net benefit for their own citizens.
• Position B I believe that countries should only go to war when it is morally right to do so.
• Position C I believe that since it is never morally right for a country to go to war, countries never should go to war.

I guess 2b is the closest to my answer. I believe in only going to war in defense.

3.) Overall, do you believe that the reasons that the US government gave for fighting its War on Terror were sufficient enough causes to go to war?

I don't consider the war on terror an actual war. Because the U.S. was attacked, I do support it. But I don't see much war going on. Just a bit of chaos in afghanistan (Iraq isn't part of the war on terror)

4.) Overall, do you believe that the execution of the War on Terror has reflected the reasons that the US Government gave for fighting it?

I'm not sure what you are asking. Are you saying the U.S. went to war for reasons other than what they said? I don't believe that. I'm sure they were wanting to do these things for years, but never felt they had the right to do so until 9/11.
Thank you very much for participating in my survey!
Micaelis Rex

[Kontiki]

Question three (and by extension, four) don't make alot of sense. The "War on Terror" isn't a war in the traditional sense, it's like the "War on Drugs". Unless you're conflating it with the Iraq and/or Afghanistan conflicts, in which case you'd be better to clarify this.

[RGBVideo]

1) Finland

2) Position A

3) Yes

4) No

Unless you're conflating it with the Iraq and/or Afghanistan conflicts, in which case you'd be better to clarify this.

I presume he's being vague on purpose.

EDIT: I just want you to know that I re-checked your updated survey questions and all of my answers still apply.

[Dauphin]

Position A can be tantamount to war of conquest. Did you mean it to be?

[Kontiki]

For that matter, question two has some odd options. You aren't going to find too many people who think it's OK to fight an "immoral" war that provides a net benefit for it's citizens. Or, put another way, if you think going to war is going to provide a benefit and you therefore support it, you're probably not going to think it's immoral.

[Dauphin]

If Position A were rephrased as "Only go to war when not doing so would lead to net negative consequence" leaves it more to a last resort position than a primary option. It could still be phrased to be more palatable though.

[Micaelis Rex]

I am being intentionally vague. You may define the war on terror as you wish, although I will say that I intended for it to donate primarily military action against (real, perceived, or both, depending on your viewpoint) terrorist entities.

[Micaelis Rex]

OK, I've slightly modified the original post to better construe the differences between the options. Hope that clears things up a bit.

[Dauphin]

1) UK.
2) Box B.
3) Yes.
4) No.

Answers are black and white....that is to say qualification on any of them could lead to a change in my answer.

[Kontiki]

I don't know what you're going for, then, but you're going to get some pretty tainted results. Because I (and the US government) views the War on Terror to not be limited to actual military conflict, I'd be forced to say that there was sufficient justification. However, that is going to lump me in with people who think going into Iraq was also justified and/or a good idea (though I'd agree the US government considers it a part of the War on Terror), which I don't.

[Kontiki]

But anyway:

1) Canada
2) Position B
3) Yes
4) Generally, yes. Completely, no.

[Flubber]

1. Canada

2. B sucks the least but I'll say that there are a lot more wars that would be "morally" justified that no one undertakes. For example I can see moral justifications for a strong nation to intervene in any number of past genocide to protect innocents but the strong nations stand idly by since it is not necessarily in their national interest to prosecute such wars.

3. The war on terror is not a war.

4. yes . If you do not consider the accuracy, truth or reality of those reasons.


As an aside , there was something strangely comforting about countries that would declare a war, fight it and then declare it over at some point. Wars against shadowy groups with no sovereign territory are so much more nebulous. Its almost like fighting crime-- You knos its impossible to stop it all so you just try to keep things to acceptable levels

[Hueij]

1: The Netherlands
2: A and B are out, but I think if a country is attacked is has the right to defend itself.
3: If 911 is the reason for Afghanistan then yes
4:no

[Gary]

UK
B
No
No