Arguments Against The Just War Theory

Superior Essays
Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, or ISIS, has permeated the minds of Americans from the right wing to the left wing. Most agree that something needs to be done to ensure the safety and security of the United States of America, but what exactly needs to be done is an entirely separate argument. If ISIS launched a series of attacks against American embassies and caused mass casualties overseas, it is the United States’ responsibility as the indispensable nation to act against them and for those who cannot fight for themselves. According to the Just War Theory, American military intervention is justified on moral grounds in this situation.
The first portion of the Just War Theory is jus ad bellum, or just initiation of war. This means that in
…show more content…
In the war on ISIS, both of these criteria are met. It is undoubtedly true that the United State’s military force is something to be reckoned with. The full force of 100,000 American troops in both Iraq and Syria creates a likely chance that the US could prevail. Regarding proportionality, jus ad bellum indicates that the war should not cause more harm than the other party was initially causing. In this case, the United States’ intervention is justified because ISIS poses a threat not just to the people of the United States, but internationally because it utilizes the “boomerang effect” when dealing with terrorism and tactics (Moser and McDonald, 2016b). The boomerang effect is the idea that an entity such as ISIS trains its foreign followers and then if their territory falls, they send their followers back to their home countries to wreck havoc. This has already been seen in the France bombings. The millions of lives at stake rest on the shoulders of the United States and its allies to stop ISIS, thus proportionality is not an issue in deciding whether or not this war is just – what is at stake if ISIS is not stopped is far greater than the possible effects of the

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    Iraq War Realism

    • 1099 Words
    • 4 Pages

    One of the main reasons why the Iraq war happened was because US wanted to balance the power that was rising in Iraq. A claim was made by Senator Bill Nelson saying that Iraq was harbouring WMDs, were specifically chemical and biological and Saddam raised a threat to United States and their allies (Congressional Record, 2004). Before the claim was made, UN had already banned any development of WMDs in Iraq after the Persian Gulf War hence there should not have been any WMDs. The threats of nuclear and chemical weapons were then heightened after the attacks on the World Trade Centre. After the ambush, there were claims that Saddam was providing military help to Al-Qaeda (The Weekly Standard, 2003).…

    • 1099 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Cause Of War Analysis

    • 1050 Words
    • 4 Pages

    security in a post September 11 world”( Goldstein & Peevehouse 2014). This statement concludes that the rise of terrorism persuaded the American people and the Bush administration of the danger that Sadam posed to America which produce an agreement to take military action internationally to ensure the safety of American citizens. Coupled with the support and belief of Sadam’s threat to the U.S. enabled the Bush administration to go forward with its plan to fight the war on terrorism. “At the interstate level, the war may be attributed to the predominance of U.S. power. With no state willing to back Iraq militarily, the United States was free to attack Iraq without fear of a large scale response” (Goldstein & Peevehouse 2014).…

    • 1050 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Bin Laden’s is partly a justification of the attacks and the war raging on, as well as a warning. Bin laden starts out saying that his country and people do not hate freedom, or security. They do not want to be under oppression or under control they want freedom, their own view of freedom not Americas. He talks about how America has laid waste to their country therefore they will lay waste to America. Then he goes on to talk about justification for the acts of terror they did because of what America has done.…

    • 801 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Throughout human existence, war has been a prevalent issue amongst countries fighting for their prominence. Using Neta Crawford’s Just War Theory, the prompt’s hypothetical situation meets all requirements for jus ad bellum, jus in bello, and jus post bellum (Crawford, 2003). War in the Middle East is justified on the grounds of it being self-defense used to disable terrorist groups in the region and bring an end to the stranglehold ISIS has on the area. The initiation of war is just, given the severity of the attack on America. Not only is the number of people killed a staggering amount, but the reach ISIS had in accomplishing attacks in 4 countries suggests ISIS is more than capable in combatting other countries to gain territory.…

    • 1277 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    Just War

    • 3235 Words
    • 13 Pages

    As explained by Cushman, it was “justified on the basis of protecting the Iraqi people from Saddam Hussein 's oppressive government and shielding the world from dangerous weapons in the hands of a tyrannous regime”, meaning that “Iraq required intervention” (Cushman, p. 404). The author understands that the war did not go as hoped, and that the existence of weapons of massive destruction and links with terrorism was not a fact, but he believed that the suffering of the people to Hussein’s regime was enough to consider it a “just war”. In fact, the author asks to some comprehension of Bush’s actions despite his many mistakes, since it could have made a difference for these innocent people, although the results were not the expected for them. Moreover, the war with Iraq follows some other criteria in order to be considered “just”. As it has already been explained, a “just war” can only be started when a government or authority is legitimate and there is a real chance of defeating the opponent.…

    • 3235 Words
    • 13 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Great Essays

    needs. During the intervention in Iran, the US “sold Saddam $200 million worth of weaponry” in order to defeat their enemy. Nonetheless, Saddam Hussain threaten U.S. interests, the White House had no doubt to overthrow or invade his territory leaving aside their past relationships. In 1991 the US imposed sanctions to Suddam Hussain, however, by 2001, he had become the “dictator” (Overthrow, 288.) Furthermore, Kinzer mentions the fact that it is the responsibility of any American leader should put US interests over any other need.…

    • 2186 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    the article talks and demand a study to find out the main reason behind horrific terrorism attacks (9/11). This article is more persuasive than the former, because it provides some evidence and information to support the thesis. For example, "Why Al-qa 'idah needed to do this as no wise human brothers including Muslims and hurts anyone without any reason". (Afghan paper calls on USA to define what terrorism is, 2007, paragraph 3). there has to be a super power behind, who is funding terrorist and paying them under the table to commence such acts against entire world, "to achieve its strategic objectives ".…

    • 1272 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    Western leaders were always portrayed by the media in a “sympathetic light.” Even military intervention and the overthrowing of Gaddafi on the part of the US, Britain, and France was diverted by the media, giving the public an inaccurate portrayal of the war on the front lines. Cockburn believes that “everybody in war has a more-than-usual strong motive for misrepresenting their achievements and failures.” Western powers are not exempt from this statement, as their primary role in this war has been to mitigate fear and lessen the growing support for ISIS. They will achieve these goals at any cost. In some cases, foreign powers do not intervene. One example is when Washington showed a lack of concern and failed to intervene militarily in Syria when chemical weapons were used against civilians.…

    • 1889 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Great Essays

    Living With Terrorism

    • 2579 Words
    • 11 Pages

    Under the Bush administration, the global war on terrorism was very broad and ever expanding, when Obama came into office his goal was to target and dismantle specific terrorist groups that threaten the citizens of the United States. Obama 's goal in dealing with terrorism is not to invade and kill all thought to be terrorists in order to stop a future attack, but by “taking out terrorist leaders in preemptive strikes when feasible, [and] using airstrikes and limited ground troops” (Kahan,2016). Through this policy, the United States could dismantle whole terrorist organizations and efforts with limited US involvement. He also says that Obama has taken a less aggressive tone on ISIS because they do not pose a serious external threat to the United States so the response will be measured accordingly, such as not putting American boots on the ground fighting ISIS. While this has caused some backlash from the media and congress, Obama thinks it the long run this will be more successful.…

    • 2579 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    They both agreed they do not feel safer, because of the current ISIS group competing with Al Qaeda. Donald stated that “ISIS needs to be hit hard by the U.S. to avoid future attacks similar to 9/11”. Nathan feels we have made progress and stated “The events of September 11 opened our eyes, but we need to stay alert”. When asked what vulnerabilities they think have been addressed or should be, both Donald…

    • 1709 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays