The Good, Moral and Just World War II
Since the Old Testament days, society has tried to define what determines war as good, moral and just. Examining the causes of war, this paper will investigate how society labels acceptable and inacceptable wars. The purpose of this paper is to discover if there is are any good, moral or just wars. Through eyewitness testimonies to historian research this paper will consider all perspectives. Further this paper will work to determine if the label types of World War II are correct or simply attributes of a bigger picture.
Moral Perspectives of a Good War
Historians and those that experienced World War II debate the moral dimensions of the straightforward and complexities that divide and unite countries. In Studs Terkel’s Pulitzer Prize-winning book, The “Good War”: An Oral History of World War Two he claimed, “World War II is widely considered one of the most morally unambiguous military conflicts in all history—the …show more content…
Those are “just cause”, “legitimate authority”, “last resort”, “probability of success”, “proportionality of goals”. A moral war must have a legitimate concern to protect those that cannot protect themselves. It must also be declared by a government and not that of a civilian. The government must further exhaust all peaceful negotiations leaving online one option. The war must be well planned minimizing the loss of civilian lives with a determined surrender of change. And the cost of war should be economically accessed to determine if there are enough assets to complete the goal. Therefore, “Some political theorists have maintained that the concept itself of “justice” in warfare is irrelevant: once the state-to-state violence starts, the domain of justice is left irrevocably behind, and only force matters, until a new power equilibrium is reached, and on its foundation the domain of peacetime justice is then reestablished.” (Bess, p.
Since the Old Testament days, society has tried to define what determines war as good, moral and just. Examining the causes of war, this paper will investigate how society labels acceptable and inacceptable wars. The purpose of this paper is to discover if there is are any good, moral or just wars. Through eyewitness testimonies to historian research this paper will consider all perspectives. Further this paper will work to determine if the label types of World War II are correct or simply attributes of a bigger picture.
Moral Perspectives of a Good War
Historians and those that experienced World War II debate the moral dimensions of the straightforward and complexities that divide and unite countries. In Studs Terkel’s Pulitzer Prize-winning book, The “Good War”: An Oral History of World War Two he claimed, “World War II is widely considered one of the most morally unambiguous military conflicts in all history—the …show more content…
Those are “just cause”, “legitimate authority”, “last resort”, “probability of success”, “proportionality of goals”. A moral war must have a legitimate concern to protect those that cannot protect themselves. It must also be declared by a government and not that of a civilian. The government must further exhaust all peaceful negotiations leaving online one option. The war must be well planned minimizing the loss of civilian lives with a determined surrender of change. And the cost of war should be economically accessed to determine if there are enough assets to complete the goal. Therefore, “Some political theorists have maintained that the concept itself of “justice” in warfare is irrelevant: once the state-to-state violence starts, the domain of justice is left irrevocably behind, and only force matters, until a new power equilibrium is reached, and on its foundation the domain of peacetime justice is then reestablished.” (Bess, p.