“The use of violence can never be legitimate.” Discuss the validity of this claim, with reference to at least on violent conflict you have studied.
In this essay I will discuss violence and its legitimacy. I will provide arguments how use of violence can be legitimate and illegitimate. Who has the authority to use violence legitimately and whose violence will be considered as illegitimate. I will write a balanced essay with both arguments in for and against the claim given in the question. I will also give my opinion in the last paragraph of the essay. I will define the key terms first and will start my arguments.
The word violence mean behaviour involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something. Non-violence mean the use of peaceful means, not force, to bring about …show more content…
Rebels are opposing the government of Bashar Al Assad and want him to abdicate from the presidency, whereas he is adamant on not leaving the presidency. Therefore, President Assad is fighting with them by using violence and dropping chemical bombs on them, which are not allowed to be used on the people. According to Arab about 400,000 people have died due to use of violence from both of the parties. Here one can understand that the violence can not be justified as the thousands of people have died and millions have displaced. Furthermore, International community has divided on this conflict, US is supporting rebels and condemning the use of violence by government. Where as Russia is supporting government and criticizing the rebels on the use of violence. Irony here is that both Russia and USA are denouncing the violence, whilst both are using violence and providing arms and ammunition to both of the parties. A rational person can understand that using violence to remove violence is like removing fire by adding more fire. Referring to the question in this case violence is not
In this essay I will discuss violence and its legitimacy. I will provide arguments how use of violence can be legitimate and illegitimate. Who has the authority to use violence legitimately and whose violence will be considered as illegitimate. I will write a balanced essay with both arguments in for and against the claim given in the question. I will also give my opinion in the last paragraph of the essay. I will define the key terms first and will start my arguments.
The word violence mean behaviour involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something. Non-violence mean the use of peaceful means, not force, to bring about …show more content…
Rebels are opposing the government of Bashar Al Assad and want him to abdicate from the presidency, whereas he is adamant on not leaving the presidency. Therefore, President Assad is fighting with them by using violence and dropping chemical bombs on them, which are not allowed to be used on the people. According to Arab about 400,000 people have died due to use of violence from both of the parties. Here one can understand that the violence can not be justified as the thousands of people have died and millions have displaced. Furthermore, International community has divided on this conflict, US is supporting rebels and condemning the use of violence by government. Where as Russia is supporting government and criticizing the rebels on the use of violence. Irony here is that both Russia and USA are denouncing the violence, whilst both are using violence and providing arms and ammunition to both of the parties. A rational person can understand that using violence to remove violence is like removing fire by adding more fire. Referring to the question in this case violence is not