It’s a sad fact that this beautiful, magical world has become a military state. We just hear about it so much these days due to social media and the Internet. Because of greedy, immoral people, the assumed solution to today’s many problems, especially between countries, is war – killing, genocide, torture, violence, and suffering. It’s frightening how often a country relies on military force to defend its country’s major multi-billion dollar enterprises – like ones refining crude oil, and mining other valuable entities such as metals and gemstones.
War is an assumed solution to today’s many problems. When exactly is military force justified? Is it ever justified? The answer lies, of course, in the eyes of the beholder. But when one considers …show more content…
For one, when there is an impending threat to one’s borders. If a country is on the verge of being invaded, it has the right to use military force. When a country’s citizens are on the brink of being slaughtered, the country as a whole should be able to resort to military force. It comes down to defending one’s way of life, not lying down and dying. Fighting for one’s borders, freedom, safety, and happiness is surely one reason to use violence and weaponry as a means for peace, though it does sound like a contradiction. In World War II, the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor – and rather than doing nothing, which would assuredly invite similar attacks and possible invasion, America went to war against the Axis Powers. The country came together and stood up for its right to freedom and happiness; it meant that no country would attack America and get away with it. This is one prime example of when military force is …show more content…
For example, in 2008, Russia attacked the former Soviet Republic Georgia. It was the typical David vs. Goliath scenario. Russia accused Georgia of foul play against the autonomous republic to the south, and sent in troops to negotiate “peace.” Instead, Russia got whatever it wanted, a buffer zone between Russia and the Middle East, in turn bullying the small country into submission. Military force was not justified on the part of Russia, but Georgian military forces surely had the right to defend its motherland. And Georgia was not a NATO country, like Turkey, the United States, the United Kingdom, France and many other countries with powerful armies that could have used military force to defend the weaker, less powerful and wealthy country of Georgia. This is a classic case of how military force should be enacted when it’s justified. A big, powerful country was bullying a small country that could not defend itself; therefore, it had the right to resort to military
War is an assumed solution to today’s many problems. When exactly is military force justified? Is it ever justified? The answer lies, of course, in the eyes of the beholder. But when one considers …show more content…
For one, when there is an impending threat to one’s borders. If a country is on the verge of being invaded, it has the right to use military force. When a country’s citizens are on the brink of being slaughtered, the country as a whole should be able to resort to military force. It comes down to defending one’s way of life, not lying down and dying. Fighting for one’s borders, freedom, safety, and happiness is surely one reason to use violence and weaponry as a means for peace, though it does sound like a contradiction. In World War II, the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor – and rather than doing nothing, which would assuredly invite similar attacks and possible invasion, America went to war against the Axis Powers. The country came together and stood up for its right to freedom and happiness; it meant that no country would attack America and get away with it. This is one prime example of when military force is …show more content…
For example, in 2008, Russia attacked the former Soviet Republic Georgia. It was the typical David vs. Goliath scenario. Russia accused Georgia of foul play against the autonomous republic to the south, and sent in troops to negotiate “peace.” Instead, Russia got whatever it wanted, a buffer zone between Russia and the Middle East, in turn bullying the small country into submission. Military force was not justified on the part of Russia, but Georgian military forces surely had the right to defend its motherland. And Georgia was not a NATO country, like Turkey, the United States, the United Kingdom, France and many other countries with powerful armies that could have used military force to defend the weaker, less powerful and wealthy country of Georgia. This is a classic case of how military force should be enacted when it’s justified. A big, powerful country was bullying a small country that could not defend itself; therefore, it had the right to resort to military