When is war justified?

[Ned]

In another thread in the History subforum, LoTM said that Bush I would have been justified to march on Baghdad and take out Saddam. I, in turn, argued that such a move was not justified and would have been a war of aggression.

Who is right?

When is war justified?

I would argue, at a minimum, that the party you attack has to have done you harm or threatened you harm in some unacceptable way, or is actively engaged in genocide.

Vis-a-vis, the United States, Saddam fit none of these critieria in 1991. Any war by the US would have been a pure act of aggession, IMHO.

[DinoDoc]

I thought you advocated defending allies, Ned.

[Ned]

Dino Doc,

Was Kuwait an ally or were we just poking our nose into someone's else business?

[Zkribbler]

I can think of four instances:

1) When your nation is attacked or have had war declared upon you. (e.g. U.S. in WW II)

2) When your ally has been attacked, and you two have a mutual defense treaty.

3) When you are fighting under the auspices of the U.N. for collective security. (e.g. Desert Shield/Desert Storm).

4) When attack on your country is imminent. (e.g. Israel is the 6-Day War).

I'm chewing on a 5th one--to retake previously captured land. Say, for example, when Egypt and Syria launched the Yon Kippur War in an attempt to retake their own territory. --But how would one separate that from a situation where, say, Mexico invades the U.S. in order to take back California, Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, and Texas? Or France invades Canada in order to take back Quebec?

[Japher]

I thought Ned was dead?

[Kuciwalker]

That's god, Japher.

[lord of the mark]

I suggest anyone responding see this question in context

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=4820095#post4820095

in which Ned is arguing that FDR and Winston Churchill, not Hitler, were responsible for WW2.

Sorry Ned, but its one thing to ask a question that spins off in a different thread or forum. If youre going to quote me out of context, in an attempt to get support against me, you need to own up to YOUR full set of opinions.

[Japher]

Ned is god!!!?? OMFG!


We're all doomed

[Lawrence of Arabia]

war is legal under any condition that satifies international law.

[Barnabas]

When your country or an ally are being attacked, or to stop a genocide even if the country is on the other side of the world and it affects you in no way-

[Kidlicious]

Re: When is war justified?

When you sit at home and talk about it while other people die.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Zkribbler
Mexico invades the U.S. in order to take back California, Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, and Texas?

We'd totally kick their ass.

[Ned]

Z, I didn't see on your list that war is justified to remove a loud-mouthed dictator who is ruthless to his political enemies. You do seem to agree that the state you make war on has to have done you harm or have, as you say, the authorization of the use of force against by the UN.

From your list, I see no justification for a Bush I march on Baghdad. Agreed?

[Japher]

what's with your avatar Ned?

War? Justified?

The only justified war is one of self-defense... right?

[Ned]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
I suggest anyone responding see this question in context

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=4820095#post4820095

in which Ned is arguing that FDR and Winston Churchill, not Hitler, were responsible for WW2.

Sorry Ned, but its one thing to ask a question that spins off in a different thread or forum. If youre going to quote me out of context, in an attempt to get support against me, you need to own up to YOUR full set of opinions.

But, LoTM, you are consistent in favoring war both on Hitler and on Saddam. If we just take Hitler out of this discussion for a moment, as the politics of NAZI Germany seem to be clouding the discussion a bit, we can assess your views in a more dispassionate hypothetical context.