The world today is one in which sovereign state-borders have been faded by the quickening pace of global-interaction and have yet to be accurately redefined to account for the progress made through globalization. Globalization, when understood as a development-oriented force, is an advocate for the global community, at the fulcrum of which stands the concept of justice as a liberating force. The doctrine of moral responsibility, in its proposed constitution, campaigns that a collective effort must be taken by individuals and states within the global community to rewrite the wrongs of the past and deliver what is deserved by all, regardless of economic, social, or geographic limitations—equality.
In 2012, the New York Times conducted an investigation …show more content…
The primary focus of Rodin’s general intolerance for collateral damage is his emphasis upon the violation of the rights of innocent individuals—a foreseeable consequence, for Rodin, of conducting drone strikes in such a way is that it could potentially impede upon the liberty of an innocent civilian/ non-combatant.
It is important to emphasize that this particular case is different from the conventional case, in that the idea is not that you are going to target somebody guilty and might have some foreseeable consequences (of harming innocents), but that you are targeting someone directly and what is merely foreseen but not intended is that that person is, in fact, innocent and you will have achieved nothing (but will have harmed an innocent civilian).
In Killing in War (2009), Jeff McMahan attempts to build a case for determining the status of individuals (whether part of the just or unjust side) within war. Given the facts and current state of the military-drone policy implemented by the United States, McMahan, I believe, would argue that the categorization of military-age males in a strike zone as enemy combatants could, under certain circumstances, be
In 2012, the New York Times conducted an investigation …show more content…
The primary focus of Rodin’s general intolerance for collateral damage is his emphasis upon the violation of the rights of innocent individuals—a foreseeable consequence, for Rodin, of conducting drone strikes in such a way is that it could potentially impede upon the liberty of an innocent civilian/ non-combatant.
It is important to emphasize that this particular case is different from the conventional case, in that the idea is not that you are going to target somebody guilty and might have some foreseeable consequences (of harming innocents), but that you are targeting someone directly and what is merely foreseen but not intended is that that person is, in fact, innocent and you will have achieved nothing (but will have harmed an innocent civilian).
In Killing in War (2009), Jeff McMahan attempts to build a case for determining the status of individuals (whether part of the just or unjust side) within war. Given the facts and current state of the military-drone policy implemented by the United States, McMahan, I believe, would argue that the categorization of military-age males in a strike zone as enemy combatants could, under certain circumstances, be