Monday, June 01, 2009

Blog #16 - Just War - WW2, Vietnam, Iraq

When we think of war, historians make a distinction between just and unjust wars. Just wars are fought by countries who hold true to principles whereas unjust wars are fought either by nations or groups w/o principles and are fought for immoral gains. This concept is as old as the Roman Empire and its great poet, Cicero, but has been also developed more thoroughly by the Catholic Church and its saints Augustine and Thomas Aquinas.


The principles of a just war include jus ad bellum, the right to go to war, and jus in bello, right conduct in war. You will see these principles fleshed out in some of the following bullets below:
  • A just war can only be waged as a last resort. All non-violent options must be exhausted before the use of force can be justified.
  • A war is just only if it is waged by a legitimate authority. Even just causes cannot be served by actions taken by individuals or groups who do not constitute an authority sanctioned by whatever the society and outsiders to the society deem legitimate.
  • A just war can only be fought to redress a wrong suffered. For example, self-defense against an armed attack is always considered to be a just cause (although the justice of the cause is not sufficient--see point #4). Further, a just war can only be fought with "right" intentions: the only permissible objective of a just war is to redress the injury.
  • A war can only be just if it is fought with a reasonable chance of success. Deaths and injury incurred in a hopeless cause are not morally justifiable.
  • The ultimate goal of a just war is to re-establish peace. More specifically, the peace established after the war must be preferable to the peace that would have prevailed if the war had not been fought.
  • The violence used in the war must be proportional to the injury suffered. States are prohibited from using force not necessary to attain the limited objective of addressing the injury suffered.
  • The weapons used in war must discriminate between combatants and non-combatants. Civilians are never permissible targets of war, and every effort must be taken to avoid killing civilians. The deaths of civilians are justified only if they are unavoidable victims of a deliberate attack on a military target. (http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/pol116/justwar.htm)

Using the criteria above, consider what you've read (and check out at least one of the links below to include in your response), tell me the following:


1. Was World War 2 a Just War? Why or why not? If it's not tell me where it fails by your criteria.

2. Was Vietnam a Just War? Why or why not? And finally, has Iraq and the rest of the War on Terror been a Just War? Why or why not?

Due Wednesday, June 3 - 250 words minimum. (20 points)

Go Wings!

Thoughts to consider:

NPR's analysis of Just War Doctrine only 4 months after the 9/11 terrorist attacks - http://www.npr.org/programs/morning/features/2002/jan/justwar/020125.justwar.html

Iraq a Just War from an Australian newspaper - http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25571560-7583,00.html

Just War Theory (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy) - http://www.iep.utm.edu/j/justwar.htm

The Nation's take on Just War after the Afghanistan War began - http://www.thenation.com/doc/20011029/falk - "The war in Afghanistan against apocalyptic terrorism qualifies in my understanding as the first truly just war since World War II."

A great compendium on JustWar Theory info by the BBC -http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/war/index.shtml

41 comments:

Donavin Camarata 5th hour said...

Well it is really hard to tell what is ACTUALLY a just or unjust war, even with the above bullets because they have some spots for speculation and with misinterpretation an attempt at a just war can become unjust with this misinterpretation. The Vietnam War in my opinion was in its own category of being just, or unjust but it has certain areas that can flow into either direction. In this case the Vietnam war with the stop to spread communism was speculated as the just reason for going to war, but it brought about many unjust actions. Americans never faced the horrors of guerilla warfare which was them using the lush jungle to their advantage hiding and doing hit and run tactics, as well as disguising themselves as civilians, which lead to unwanted civilian casualties. We ended up leaving Vietnam resulting in a loss of the war after being brutally battered for almost 2 decades, with the end result of it being a unjust war, massive Military casualties, and massive civilian casualties. Also were the destruction of many lush jungles as well as the toxins from Agent Orange affected the next generation as well. The war on Iraq is similar to the Vietnam war because it was a war that started with good intentions, and terms. The intentions being the eliminating of any nuclear weapons in the hands of the terrorists, and we officially went to war because of the 9/11 attack on our home front and in which many Americans demanded war. I consider the Iraq war just because it helped eliminate many terrorist insurgents and the finding of many hidden weapon caches. But once again the harsh tactics were brought up again by Al-Qaeda groups, using civilians as their camouflage, and suicidal bombing’s lifted the death toll of civilians and raised the blame on America.

Joe Wallace said...

1.) I think that World War 2 was a just war for many reasons. First of all the U.S was attacked by the Japanese. The U.S had no idea that this attack was coming and I don’t think that the Japanese had a just reason to attack the U.S. The only reason that the U.S went to war with Japan was because they attacked us when we obviously were not prepared for war at all. Also in Europe, Hitler was trying to essentially trying to take over the world, so we kind of had a responsibility to stop him. The only questionably unjust part of World War 2 would be the attack of Pearl Harbor.

2.) On the other hand, I do not think that the Vietnam War was a just one. First of all I don’t think that all non-violent options were exhausted, I think that the U.S could have worked a little harder for peace. Second or all many innocent Vietnamese citizens were killed during this war. The U.S also destroyed many civilian towns which contained no Viet Cong. This already is breaking at least two of the principles of a just war.

3.) I also do no think that Iraq was a just war either. We went in only because the government thought that Iraq was concealing nukes, but there was no proof that they actually had any. I think that’s Bush just used this as an excuse because he thought that the U.S should go to war in Iraq. Although the Australian Newspaper article claiming that this was a just war is pretty convincing, I just don’t believe that the U.S went into Iraq with just intentions.

Tim T. said...

World War II is a just war, by try to stop a horrible dictator, bring peace back to Europe, and to help our allies regain their land. Hitler and his army were moving swiftly through Europe. He only wanted to have one race and that was the German race, they thought they were the best and no other race could bet them. The U.S went into the war to help their allies who had lost their land to the Nazi regime. If we did not go in this war at the time we did things could have changed and been really bad, the Germans could have came to America and fought the battle on our homeland. Even through that might not have happened it was a possibility. One of the big things to tell if it was a just war, is did you try non-violence first, the U.S and allies knew that Hitler did not want to talk. He went in the war full on by taking Poland this man only had two foals, to make the German race the best and to concur the world. WWII had the principles of the just war down. They went in for the right rezones and they conducted the war right even if it does not seem that way. In the other part of WWII when the U.S was fighting the Japanese, we went in the war for self-defense. When the Japanese’s attacked the U.S, it was the first attack in modern history on U.S soil. People were shocked that somebody would do this. We knew they wanted war; we had most of the reasons to go in that war. When we dropped the atomic bomb we did not think about the Japanese citizens, all the American government was focusing on was ending this war. The U.S army had never seen battle tact’s that say run at the soldiers with knifes on the guns and risk their life. They never saw a enemy fight to their last man. The war in Iraqis just, we try to be nice to the Al-Quieda and the corrupt government in Iraq. We even funded the terror groups in the cold war. The grouped attacked the pentagon and that has never been attacked in the time it was built, these people had no care of dieing because they would go to heaven and have many virgins waiting for them. We went in to restore peace and for the self-defense against our country. The Vietnam War it was a just war with principles, some people look at the deaths and see how many men died. The government wanted the stop of communism and that was one country that was going to communism. People think it is an un-just war because we lost it says nothing about losing. Principle is we have to think we are going to win the war, we did think we were going to win and we did not expect a gorilla style warfare. Most all wars are just, the U.S has never encountered a un-just war, to my standards and thinking.

Anonymous said...

CHANEL JOHNSON.. 3RD HOUR

1. Was World War 2 a Just War? Why or why not? If it's not tell me where it fails by your criteria.

**I dont really know if World War 2 would be considered a just or unjust war. "The ultimate goal of a just war is to re-establish peace" I do not think WW2 began to create peace but more for a sort of revenge. Maybe soon into the war countries wanted to make peace with the war but not at the start of the war. Though there are ways that WW2 could be considered a just war.. Ex:"A just war can only be fought to redress a wrong suffered. For example, self-defense against an armed attack is always considered to be a just cause". I do not think that it would be safe to call World War 2 a just war because there are far to many compares and contrasts.


2. Was Vietnam a Just War? Why or why not? And finally, has Iraq and the rest of the War on Terror been a Just War? Why or why not?

**I do think that Vietnam was a just war. A just war can only be fought to redress a wrong suffered. They wanted revenge of being violated by the U.S. A "just war" seems to usually take place when a wrong needs to be redressed. Just as Vietnam I do think that the war on Iraq is a just war. "A just war can only be fought with right intentions." The U.S is in Iraq because of Iraq tactics that were established by Al-Qaeda and PEACE is what is trying to be established between these two countries.

Sarra S said...

I believe that World War 2 was a Just War. From the criteria you supplied for us that was listed above, World War 2 agrees with all of the bullet points. Some examples of the fact that World War 2 agrees with the bullets include the following; The United States went into war after the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. This event agrees with the bullet; A just war can only be fought to redress a wrong suffered. For example, self-defense against an armed attack is always considered to be a just cause. Roosevelt was the legitimate authority involved. Fighting was also a last resort because there was no way that we could let another Pearl Harbor occur again. Furthermore, Roosevelt was confident that we could do very well in the war. Roosevelt felt that re-establishing peace was also a very important thing to do in the war.

The Vietnam War was not a Just War. We were in Vietnam for much longer than we ever needed to be. This caused much more deaths than there needed to be. It was also not a last resort nor was there any attack on the United States that would have led us into war with Vietnam. We also continued fighting in the war even when it looked like there was a great chance that we would not be victorious. Furthermore, establishing peace was never our plan; we wanted to get rid of any possible threats or enemies. Torture and harmful chemicals were also used in the war. Last, the violence that was used in the war was no where near proportional to the injury suffered. The Vietnamese lost millions of people and we lost tens of thousands.

The Iraq and the rest of the War on Terror has agreed with much of the criteria of a Just War but should not be referred to as this. It agrees because the United States decided to fight back after the terrorist attack on 9/11/2001. It was also waged by a legitimate authority, President George W. Bush. Furthermore, we were convinced that we would have a great chance at winning the war. While in Iraq, we captured Saddam Hussein to help re-establish peace. But, torture and violent chemicals have been used by us. This not only is unjust but highly harmful to innocent civilians.


sarra serhane 5th

Lisa S fifth said...

When looking at the points listed to explain what makes a war “just,” I feel that World War 2 can be justified to follow the criteria of these bullet points. During this time, I believe that the United States entered into World War two as a last resort option. When Italy, Germany, and Japan joined to make the Axis powers, the U.S did not jump right in to help their fellow allies’. Even after axis nations were instigating us by destroying property and ships. Our country waited until a large-scaled attack was directly suffered in the U.S; in our case it happened to be the bombs and kamikaze fighters attacking Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. After that, congress quickly passed the order to wage war on Japan. When going into an overseas battle, the Truman administration and our country felt that we had a good chance of winning this war with the help from Britain and the Soviets. The Three leaders, Churchill, Lenin, and Truman sought out the best ideas to limit the number of casualties and create peace throughout the European countries. The soldiers were able to tell the difference between rival soldiers and didn’t use their power to hurt civilians. All the weapons used in this war were just and were only there for the good of the cause, which was defeating the Axis powers. When talking about Vietnam, I don’t believe that it was a just war. More treaties could have been created before we went in to help South Vietnam. While going in, there was much support at home about winning this war but, over time Nixon seemed to over use his power and invade countries after he knew that winning was far from possible. Soldiers killed civilians and ruined land when ordered no to and Napalm was used which has affected people for years even after the war ended. Our most recent War on Terror is both just and unjust. We were attacked on 9/11, which gave us a reason to invade some Middle Eastern countries. The Bush administration told us that there were WMD that were never found. Soldiers haven’t abused their power and weapons are being used for the “right thing.” I don’t think that anyone can say just yet if the War on Terror follows the criteria of BBC’s ethics. When the war is over and looked back on, truths with come out and people will be able to really tell if this war was a good or bad thing.

Katie Nicholls, 5th Hour said...

I think that World War 2 was a “Just War”. I think this because based off of the information from the articles and the description of a “just war”, pretty much every description explains WW2. For example, after Pearle Harbor, the US had to get even with Japan. This event agrees with the bullet: “A just war can only be fought to redress a wrong suffered”. Fighting was also considered a last resort because we couldn’t let anything else happen to our country. Roosevelt felt that that would be the best approach and that we would succeed, which is related to one of the points, “A war can only be just if it is fought with a reasonable chance of success.”

I think that the Vietnam War was not a “Just War”. I think this because there were too many purposeless deaths, which violates one of the points, being “States are prohibited from using force not necessary to attain the limited objective of addressing the injury suffered”. Also, it wasn’t a last resort and Vietnam didn’t attack us in the first place for us to go and invade them and start a war. Even though one of the major points is “The ultimate goal of a just war is to re-establish peace”, we never really established that peace that we needed to. For example, harsh chemicals and torture were used, which shows that we didn’t care about the people, we just wanted to win the war.

I think that Iraq and the rest of the War on Terror was a “Just War”. It relates to the points because the U.S. had to react to Iraq’s attack on 9/11. Also, “A war is just only if it is waged by a legitimate authority”, George Bush was the legitimate authority to wage the war. Including another point, “A war can only be just if it is fought with a reasonable chance of success”, we had a great chance at success.

Anonymous said...

From the bullent points above, I belive World War two was a just war. It followed all of the criteria above. Even though when we nuked Japan and there was a lot of civilian casuities but if we invaded Japan there would have been so many deaths of U.S troops and Japan troops. The Civilians were also willing to fight till the death, unfortantly. so we did not have any other choice but to use nukes. it was the best way to defeat them. Since, they attacked us first when we were unprepared it was a just war.

The war was not a Just war was Vietnam. Vietnam did not attack us directly. We didnt use war as the last resort we could have done more treaties and try to talk to them before invading them. When we were on there soil attacking them we did not try avoiding civilans because we burned down cities and use Agent Orange, which caused many cancers cases.

So far Iraq can be consindered as a "just" war. it follows all of the critera but it is to early to consider if the war of terror is a just war or not. when it is over we can decide if it is or if it is not.

Kyle DeWald 3rd

Anonymous said...

I think that World War 2 was a just war for many reasons. First of all the U.S was attacked by the Japanese. The U.S had no idea that this attack was coming and I don’t think that the Japanese had a just reason to attack the U.S. The only reason that the U.S went to war with Japan was because they attacked us when we obviously were not prepared for war at all. Also in Europe, Hitler was trying to essentially trying to take over the world, so we kind of had a responsibility to stop him. The only questionably unjust part of World War 2 would be the attack of Pearl Harbor. On the other hand, I do not think that the Vietnam War was a just one. First of all I don’t think that all non-violent options were exhausted, I think that the U.S could have worked a little harder for peace. Second or all many innocent Vietnamese citizens were killed during this war. The U.S also destroyed many civilian towns which contained no Viet Cong. This already is breaking at least two of the principles of a just war. I also do no think that Iraq was a just war either. We went in only because the government thought that Iraq was concealing nukes, but there was no proof that they actually had any. I think that’s Bush just used this as an excuse because he thought that the U.S should go to war in Iraq. Although the Australian Newspaper article claiming that this was a just war is pretty convincing, I just don’t believe that the U.S went into Iraq with just intentions.

Amanda S.

Anonymous said...

I think that the Iraq war isn’t a just war. But according to Omar Fahil Al- Nidawi Iraq is just a war he thinks that it’s a just war because the decade after the Ba’ath Party toke over Bagdad in the summer of 1968. He says the war ended the 35year long nightmare and that life is better then it was before 2003.But the freedom of Iraq has come a with the lost of many brave men ,women, and children. also the people of Iraq have died and you hear about every day on the news. I think that Iraq never was a just war because the only reason we went over there was to find something that was never there also we are wasting trillions of dollars in this war.
I think that Vietnam both a just and an unjust war. I think it was a just war because we tried to spread of communism. But it was unjust because we used chemical warfare the use of Agent Orange and that affected everybody it caused birth defects and caused our war veterans to have cancer. The Vietnamese used guerrilla warfare which was unfair to our troops since we didn’t no the terrain and they did. This led to many unwanted deaths. The Vietnamese had 3 to 4 million from both sides while only 58,159 Americans died.
Devonny Bell
3rd hour

Matt Trogu said...

To me I think that WW2 was just war because the United States went over all the non-violent options before they dropped the bomb. One of the main reasons for going into WW2 was to stop Hitler from making the Nazi regime the most powerful race in the world. Since Hitler was not the talking type we had to resort to violence. Another reason why we went to war was the sneak attack by Japan on Pearl Harbor. One of the reasons for a just war is that “A just war can be fought to redress a wrong suffered”. If we would have sat back after the attack then the Japanese would have felt that they were in control so we had to fight back to protect ourselves. After the attack on Pearl Harbor the United States was one of the most powerful countries in the world, and when you fight a just war you have to have a good chance of winning that war. This is how WW2 was a “Just War”
On the other hand the Vietnam War was not a just war. The United States was doing whatever they needed to win. For example when they were dropping the Agent Orange throughout the Vietnamese forests they weren’t killing only the trees and plants but they were killing innocent civilians at the same time. Many of the tactics that were used in the Vietnam War were not needed. One of the reasons for a just war is that “States are prohibited from using force not necessary to attain the limited objective”. This is why the Vietnam War was not a “Just War”

Evan Fried said...

Well you see World War two is potentially a Just war, as they call it. In the end it's all based on the person's point of view. Pacifists and people of the sort may not even give it a second thought and say it was not a just war, but on the other hand a person like a white republican catholic from the south will probably say all wars are Just. But in my opinion from a non-bias stand point i believe it was a Just war. You have got to look at the facts, driving factors, things going on behind the scenes and the like. All of these play a part in deciding if a war is Just or not. For one thing we were bombed on America soil, those are just things that no one in this country should tolerate. Other factors include the holocaust, which was the most horrific genocide in history, and another key factor driving the war effort was the fight to stop communism. It was clearly spreading more and more and something had to be done to stop it. That's where America comes in. Now to the topic of Vietnam being a Just war. Was it? Was it not? once again based on opinion. In my opinion i feel it was not Just. It was billions of dollars, and thousands and thousands lives wasted. Incredibly pointless to go into war with Vietnam. Iraq was defiantly not a Just war but I feel that the War on Terror is completely a Just war. Terrorists don't play by the rules of war and they must be stopped.

sam s 5th said...

I don’t think WW2 was just a war I think it was a last resort. I feel that the US did everything we could to try and stay out of war. In the “Just a war Theory” it talks about why war is fought. In this case the war was fought in a last resort situation. Even though when we bombed Japan there were many civilian causalities, if we would have invaded Japan there would have been more US troop deaths. So nukes were the best option for the US troops from the US point of view. I feel Vietnam wasn’t just a war because we didn’t use war as a last resort options in the case of Vietnam. Vietnam didn’t attack us directly. There were more options we could have used before invading Vietnam. Iraq could be just a war although it is not finished yet. It follows all my criteria but it is too early in the war to determine for sure.

Allison Woodberg (5th hour) said...

The concept of a just war is difficult, and for some wars it is hard to tell whether or not it really is a just war or not. I would consider World War two a just war because it started largely because of Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor. The United States responded with our involvement in the war as a result of this attack. Another part of defining something as a just or unjust war is whether or not all things were done to prevent the war, and in the case of World War two, peace talks were attempted before the attack, but failed, so that made a war a more needed option.
Vietnam was not a just war in my opinion, because we were not attacked, the United States also did not have to go to war, we just chose too, in order to try to prevent the spread of communism, however by the definition of just wars this would not satisfy the requirements. We did not need to get involved; it was not really our issue to start with. Also many civilians were killed, because the Viet Cong were nearly impossible to separate and identify from any other civilian.
As for the war on terror, I think that it started out as just war, but has progressed not to be. The United States did have a just reason to go to war in the first place, because we were attacked on 9/11. Now I think that the war on terror has escalated to an unjust war, mainly because innocent civilians are not to be harmed in a just war, and that has not been the case in the war on terror. Even though the Australian newspaper said that it found the Iraq war to be just, I disagree, because of how it has been handled in the later years of the war.

Anonymous said...

Paige Peak hr3

Based on the information in the bullets world war 2 is a just war because it was a last resort after the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. World War 2 was set out by Franklin Roosevelt. After the Pearl Harbor bombing the war was to redress a wrong suffered. World War 2 was self defense against an armed attack. Since a just war can only be fought if there is a reasonable chance of success that was a good thing because America had more troops than the Japanese did. In the end World War 2 was a just war because this war was fought with good intentions, civilians were not be killed and the ultimate goal of World War 2 was to re-establish peace in Europe.

The Vietnam war is not a just war because it was a completely different war than World War 2. There was no last minute resort because Vietnam did not attack us first. The United States went to Vietnam with no chance of winning at all. There were many deaths that didn’t have to be caused because we should not have been there anyway .During the war there was killing and attacking of civilians while they were not unavoidable victims. They became targets along with the Vietnamese troops.
So far I would consider the Iraq war a just war because it was set by one person “Bush”.
There was a deliberate attack on America with September 11th and this war was a last result to defend our country.

Allison Smart said...

When you look at the criteria for a just war I believe that World War 2 was within that. Since Japan attacked us first in Pearl Harbor I believe that we had the right to defend ourselves. Although we ended up entering a war against Germany and Italy along with Japan I do think that it was just to defend an Uncalled for attack. We didn’t want another event like Pearl Harbor to occur so the only option was to fight back. We also had a legitimate leader behind us, Franklin Roosevelt. He was thinking about entering the war from the start but thought it would be very hard on America If we did. This was just one event that gave us a better reason to enter because finally the war had come to us.

When you look at the Vietnam It is harder to justify the war. For this reason I don’t think that it was a just war. We didn’t have a very good reason to go to war in the first place. Vietnam didn’t attack us and they weren’t even threatening our safety or well being. We stayed in longer then planned and therefore had more deaths then needed. The only thing on the list of just causes that happened in Vietnam is that we were trying to establish peace between North and South Vietnam.

Concerning the war in Iraq it is hard to determine if that would be considered just. There are many things that do make it just but also some that aren’t. I think that The Iraq war is just in that there was an attack on us before we even did anything and that we couldn’t negotiate anything to prevent the war from happening. The reasons I think that it was unjust was that on top of trying to prevent terrorism we decided to invade Iraq and solve that problem too. There was no real evidence of anything wrong except that of what we knew of the country at the time.
Allison Smart

Anonymous said...

Tyler DeWald 3rd hour

What exactly defines a just war? In my opinion a just war is stopping a nation, country or a person from taking over other country or places where they do not belong. So, considering that World War II, was a just war. Many reasons of why but the main reason, was a person of great power, a horrible but powerful dictator, Hitler, was taking over all of Europe. Hitler believed himself and his people, as the dominate race. Hitler only wanted to have one race and that was the German race, they thought they were the best and no other race could bet them. If the U.S entered the war earlier, we would have saved our Allies land from the Nazi’s regime. Then again, if we didn’t enter the war at all; Hitler probably would have controlled all of Europe and Asia. Another big thing that the U.S did back then, we don’t anymore but we still should, we waited, try to talk it out first with Hitler. Try a non violence approach to the disagreement. Overall, World War II was a just war; there was a reason why we should go to war, just not for personal gain. We tried to talk it out with Hitler but from the text Hitler did not want to talk. And then, war against a dictator.

Brandon Kauth said...

World War II was both a just, and unjust war. Everything that took place in Europe in the early 1940’s is very complex and can be looked at in multiple perspectives. The United States and our allies did not exhaust all non violent solutions in WWII. There was never really a chance to even begin to look for non violent solutions as the Germans were busy blitzkreiging in Europe. The allied forces never had to chance to a peaceful resolution to Hitler’s reign. WWII was just by have legitimate authorities calling the shots, like Churchill, Stalin, and FDR. Other countries in Europe also had just cause because they had to defend themselves against the Germans.
I do not think that Vietnam was a just war. Simply because we did no exhaust our peaceful solutions and the violence used in the war must be proportional to the injury suffered. The war was waged with legitimate authority though. Peace was already generally set in among the people of Vietnam, we were not trying to re-restore it.
I do think that the Iraq war and the war on terrorism is a just war. We are trying to restore peace across the Middle East, but that cannot happen if we still have insurgents in the streets causing an unsafe environment for civilians. The war is run at least by the alleys in legitimate authority. We do not negotiate with terrorists, so there are not many peaceful solutions to be exhausted, nor are the insurgents and Al-Qaeda the most friendliest people on the planet. I also believe that the ultimate goal in the war on terrorism is to restore peace.

Tyler Porritt (5th) said...

Just wars are based on the person’s opinion of them. They depend on how the person thinks and that person’s values.
1. In my opinion, World War II was a just war for the U.S. We did not get into the war in its early stages, except for giving our allies aid. Then, we were attacked by Japan at Pearl Harbor. That incident brought us into World War II. In my opinion, World War II was a just war because we were fighting in self-defense, at least at first. Later in the war, we fought Adolf Hitler. The reason for fighting him was also just; he was killing millions of innocent people, and trying to assert his rule over the world.
2. I do not think that Vietnam was a very just war. We decided to fight in Vietnam because we thought that if we allowed Communism to spread, then soon all of the Communist countries would be allied against us. We fought in North and South Vietnam to stop this spread. In hindsight, it was a very bad idea to go to Vietnam, due to the massive amount of casualties sustained there. Also, we did not accomplish our main task, which was to stop the spread of Communism. This was not a just war. The War on Terror, however, was. When we were attacked on 9/11, it shook our entire countries foundation. We fought back against Afghanistan, and those who attacked us. When we went into Irag, it was for a just cause, to remove Saddam Hussein from power. We should have stopped after we had done that though. Now we are pouring money and resources into the war, and it is getting us nowhere.

Luke Szczurek said...

I think that World War 2 was a Just War. We entered this war as a last option we had. It was a Just war because we were at peace and Japan attacked us out of the blue. After being attacked like that we had to get involved and fight. We didnt have any other option but to enter the war. Im supprised we didnt enter the war when the germans started taking over and started killing many in the camps and when Italy Germany and Japan came together to create the Axis Powers. Vietnam wasnt really a just war for us. We didnt have to get involved in this war because we were in peace and no one attacked us or had threatened to attack us or start war with us. The U.S. could have sent out many more treaties and tried to work out the situation more before declaring war with them.

Anonymous said...

Melanie Eiten
3rd hour
I have decided to write this blog with my family because they have two different views on this topic. My brother who I seem to agree with more believes that the war in Vietnam was an unjust war because we went into the war to fast and didn’t go into the war as a last resort. Vietnam was having an election during the time and they were going to vote for communism and we decided that they couldn’t do that so we went in and decided to fight. In my mothers opinion, the reason for going into the war was just but doesn’t believe that the way we fought the war was just, she believes on this side of this topic she believes we went into the war only to stop the spread of communism and went in after the French colonized Vietnam. Also my mother believes that the only people that were killed during the war were only the Vietcong hiding in the forests. My brother believes that the people were killed in an unjust way and the Vietcong were only hiding in the forest because we were bombing all the villages and they had no place to go. So my brother believes the injuries in war were not proportional to the injury suffered, where as my mother more believes that they force used was proportional to the injury suffered. Now more in my opinion (with a little help from my brother) the war in Iraq cannot have a well informed opinion because we do not know all the facts about it. But I can say that it was kind of unjust to make a connection between 9/11 and Iraq because we went to war with Iraq soon after our country was attacked by terrorism. There were no weapons of mass destruction found so we got into this war not knowing all the facts. Even though the reasons given seem legitimate they are not all truthful. Even thought we did not go into the war to make lives better for the Iraqis, us going into the war made life a lot better for the majority of them. As the author of The Australian said about the war and how it really helped Iraq "For me and many Iraqis, it was certainly worth it. Life is better today than it was before 2003.” This shows that even though we went in to Iraq for all the wrong reasons we created success and hope for another country.

Ismail K said...

I do not think WW2 was a just war. A just war can only be waged as a last resort. All non-violent options must be exhausted before the use of force can be justified. WW2 was not a last resort; there were no non-violent options that were exhausted before the force was used. Hitler blamed the Jews for all there troubles and he said if they rose up and stopped them all of there troubles will be solved. When you go to war to kill off a race or religion will never be a just war. I think the US’s point of view of entering the war will make it a just war. A just war can only be fought to redress a wrong suffered. For example, self-defense against an armed attack is always considered to be a just cause. The only permissible objective of a just war is to redress the injury. America was attacked by the Japanese at Pearl Harbor and thousands of civilian and soldiers lives were lost. We just entered the war for self- defense and to redress the injury we suffered. I also do think the Vietnam War was a just war. We came in to help innocent lives from being killed and also for self defense. If we did not attempt to stop Vietnam from becoming a communist country other countries could have possibly become communist and could of attacked America. As for the War in Iraq, it isn’t a just war we went there for no reason and didn’t plan it and it was a mistake. But for the rest of the war on terror I think attacking Afghanistan was just because we were redressing injury suffered on 9/11

Mike Mafrice said...

It is hard to say whether World War 2 was a just war. I mean the U.S., acted in self-defense when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor but there are many other countries involved for different reasons. A just war can be called self-defense where if another country attacks you and then you go to war to settle problems. Another part of the "just war" is after all things are said and done the countries are peaceful with each other. I'm not to sure the whole peace thing worked out because some Americans still view Germans as mean and nasty, the same goes for other countries. Innocent citizens didn't really play a role in combat like they do in Iraq. In World War 2 the United States and Great Britain weren't shooting up civilians, in other words it was much easier to see who the bad guys were. For the most part World War 2 was a just war. The war on terror and Vietnam were very different from World War 2. In the war on terror we were attacked first with the whole 9/11 incident. This follows the criteria for a just war where once a rival country attacks you, you go to war with them. However for both Vietnam and the war on terror civilians played a big role in the wars because of the guerilla warfare. Many innocent citizens' villages were burned down in Vietnam and many innocent civilians are killed in Iraq and Afghanistan because of suicide bombers and we don't know who is bad and who is good.

Anonymous said...

When you look at the criteria need in order for a war to be a "just war" you see that World War 2 was most definitely within that same region. After reading and interpreting the articles that justify the meaning of a "just war"(in the bullets), I concluded that World War 2 was indeed within that category. Another reason, as to why I take this position, is the fact that it started because of Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor, and the United States immediately became involved in the war. Nothing was done to prevent the war. The United States was focused on getting even with Japan instead. The Bullet says: "A just war can only be fought to redress a wrong suffered".
However I do not believe that Vietnam War was a just war due to the fact the Vietnam War contained a lot of unnecessary causalities which is not an element of a "just war". Our reasons for going to war with Vietnam were not very reasonable; in fact there really wasn't a legit reason as to why we attacked them. I also believe that the war was basically just a waste of billions of dollars, and millions of lives lost as well.
Allacia Gibson
3rd Hour

Anonymous said...

I believe that world war two was a just war to certain points through out it. Points that it was a just war was when the fighting was being done on moral grounds and ethically, but there were times in the war when attacks were snuck upon the enemies with out warning. An example of this would be pearl harbor. This is a perfect example of a unjust war because pearl harbor was never suppose to happen due to the Japanese making "Peace" with the united states. Peace metals were exchanged and the war was technically over before the bombing took place but this was the intensions of Japan to sneak attack the us armed forces. until then world war two was for the most part a just war because it wasn't between nations and the fighting was being done ethically instead of through lying and cheating others.
I think that Vietnam was an unjust war as well because it was between nations much like world war two and the fighting was done "dirty". for example, there was gasses put into the air which killed the civilians as well as the forests which was way out of the line on the united states part because there was no real immediate threat from either one of those.
Lastly I believe that the Iraq war and other wars on terror s is a just war because the united states was not the first ones to strike in either of those wars but we are defending ourselves which makes these wars legit and completely necessary for the well being of the United States and its citizens.
Eric Bruning
Hour 3

Mary Seymour said...

Mary Seymour
my actual blog answer, the other one was missing some stuff

I believe World War 2 was just War. It fits a lot of criteria of a just war. I think that the attack on pearl harbor was just, because we were distracted and they were intending to harm our troops and equipment, rather than harmless civilians. Although the attack on Pearl Harbor was awful, it didn’t go against the standards of a just war. The attack caused us to enter WW2, and going up against Japan. The reason we went into World War 2 seems just because we would have looked like we willingly put Japan in control without any effort to get them below us. By entering the war, we showed hope, and that we weren’t giving up yet.
Vietnam was a Just War for several reasons. I think that we should have tried more non-violent options before entering Vietnam war, and that it shouldn’t have been as rushed as it was. Also, we killed too many innocent lives there to be considered justified. We also destroyed many towns which was beyond our boundaries that we should have kept.
Iraq and the rest of the War on Terror have definitely not been a Just War. The reason of the war is unjust because they attacked innocent civilians just to put a big impact in the U.S, not to damage our military system. Another reason is that we unjustly went into their country looking for “nukes” that were possibly nonexistent. We have killed many innocent people there just looking for the small group that started everything. I don’t think that is fair at all.
http://www.iep.utm.edu/j/justwar.htm On this website, it says,
“That is, just war theory should be universal” But im wondering, if no ones patrolling the theory, then what will motivate countries to remain “just”. Its like having a community with laws but no one to watch over them. Things will remain calm for a while, but once a few countries start bending the rules, things can just break down into chaos. But there hasn’t been an immediate break though in wars yet when things just go into chaos, but I think its soon to come.

Anonymous said...

Vietnam at one point in the war may have been a just war, but as time went on and the death count rose and the war itself escalated it quickly became an unjust war that we could have easily won had we ended it sooner than we did. But we waited to long and every aspect of the war became unjust and unneeded. With the millions of people who died in the Vietnam War I don’t see how if you look at it to be able to say it was a just war, it became filled with lies and corruption and quickly became an unjust war. Iraq and the war on terror could be seen as an unjust war and a just war. America stayed in a little longer than we might have needed to be in and with that causing more deaths than needed, and that could be seen as unjust but when people from Iraq are saying that overall Iraq is a safer place and there is a clear difference for the good since 2003 then it is hard to say that the war in Iraq was unjust. I think with every war there are going to be parts of the war that might not be just, cause no war goes as planned but overall I do think that the war on Iraq was an just as it could have been, I did not agree with President Bush to go into war in the first place so I cannot say it was totally just, but with not agreeing with President Bush’s decision to go into Iraq I think it was a pretty just war. Jacob Silver

bobby haag said...

1. I think World War II was a just war. The war had Hitler trying to conquer and take over the world, so the U.S. had to try and stop him. That means we didn’t enter the war just to take over countries or anything, but we were just trying to prevent more damages, killings, and war. Also, Japan attacked us in the beginning because of the Axis Power’s defense, and since we attacked back the Italians and Germans got involved. I overall think this war was just.
2. Vietnam War was not a just war, in my opinion. A just war “can only be fought to redress a wrong suffered”. In Vietnam, the U.S. invaded the towns and people’s homes who weren’t even involved or a threat to us. We killed a lot of innocent people in Vietnam which does not make this a just war.
3. The Iraq war was more unjust than just. The U.S. went to Iraq after the terrorist attacks and because we thought they had bombs like nukes. We did go there to protect our citizens since we were attacked first, but I still do not believe this was a just war.
BOBBY HAAG 3rd HOUR

Jake Prosyniuk 3rd Hour said...

Looking at World War 2 objectively, I’d actually tend to say the war was not a just war, at least on the German front. The Germans had yet to hurt us, save the attacks on our ships headed to Britain (and those were most likely only so they could take over Britain). I doubt the Germans ever had intentions of attacking the US directly, especially because we were so strong at the time. We had not exhausted many of our methods for preventing the war. We did have reasonable chances for success, but we did not have much of a reason to attack them, justice-wise. We did not suffer much violence due to German attacks, so our retaliation could be considered unjust. However, our war with Japan was very justifiable. The Japanese attacked first, and we had tried to reach a peaceful solution before this. We were attempting to restore peace after they had disrupted it. One part of our retaliation that was not just was the dropping of the nuclear warheads. They did not discriminate between combatants and noncombatants, and the damage they caused was huge compared to the damage the Japanese dealt to us. Overall, I’d say only half of World War 2 was justifiable, and even at that, we might have gone a little far.

Anonymous said...

I do not think that World War 2 was a just war. There are several facts that support the statement that was stated by me just a little while ago. Weapons were used that the other fighting countries didn’t have access too. There was also a colossal body count from the Germans. Civilians were injured in the crossfire of the war which also omits to the fact that this was a just war. This can relate to the comic book series “Civil War”. The comic book series is about masked superheroes revealing themselves to the police so that it would not be a crime to do what they do. The other side of it is that some of them want to keep their identity safe, as proclaimed over and over by Spiderman. In this fictional civil war both sides had these super powers which were fair but some had better ones than the other.
I think that Vietnam was in fact a just war. All of the criteria that qualify a war to be just fit so perfectly with the Vietnam War. Even though we had lost it didn’t make what had happened any less just. I also think that the War on Terror has been a just war. Even though some civilians are injured, that is only because the enemies look a lot like the civilians in the War. Like in the Marvel Civil War, How is one superhero supposed to distinguish from another when they are not in tights? It is almost impossible unless they are bigger than a truck or made out of pure metal. One second you could be walking down the street passing a normal looking dude and the next, BOOM! Blasted in the face with a fire ball. What I am trying to get at is that I think that if a just war is ever started each side should wear distinguishable tights so we can tell who is who and no one is getting blasted in the face by a fireball.

Love,
Ryan St. John

Sydney Hirsch said...

1. I believe World War 2 was a just war because it was a last resort – America did not decide to participate in it until the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor in 1941. It was not only in an act of defense of America, but our allies as well. America’s army prepared to fight in World War II, and since our army is one of the best in the world, we definitely had a good chance of winning, which is also a characteristic of a just war. With the support of the country behind our army, many people went to work in place of soldiers, sacrificed food and supply amounts, and encouraged citizens to support the army.
2. I don’t think the Vietnam War was a just war because it was NOT a last resort. The United States did not need to get involved in it, and did not need to stay engaged in it for as long as they did. Not only that, but many civilians were harmed because American soldiers burnt down their villages and homes and targeted them for fear of them being guerrilla Viet Cong soldiers. I think that in some ways, Iraq and the rest of the War on Terror is just, but in other ways, it isn’t. Many non-combatants have been killed in this war, and I don’t think it was a last resort. That being said, the war is being fought with a reasonable chance of success, a goal to re-establish peace, and redress a wrong suffered.

Donavin Camarata 5th hour said...

1. Was World War 2 a Just War? Why or why not? If it's not tell me where it fails by your criteria.
(Blog continued)
World war 2 was a just war because we went into in officially AFTER Japan had attacked us at pearl harbor. World war 2 was a just war also because we helped stopped the rise in the number of casualties. When we went into war we also helped remove the Nazi’s power and their movement to eliminate the Jews. Unlike the other wars the U.S. has faced, after our involvement in the war we helped fund and rebuild Europe from its war torn state.

Kevin Luyckx said...

Was WW2 a just war? In my opinion it was. I think this simply because we were attacked and in one of the above statements it says “self defense against an armed attack is always considered to be jus…” and the US was attacked by the Japanese. I think if the Japs wouldn’t have attacked us we wouldn’t have gotten into the war at that point even with Churchill breathing down FDR’s neck. Also above it says “the ultimate goal of a just war is to re establish peace” and that’s the US was trying to do. They wanted peace throughout the world. The US was fighting against the Nazi party. One of the rules of an un just war is to talk first but talking with the Germans was not an option. FDR, Churchill, Stalin, and even Harry Truman knew that Hitler wasn’t talking he wanted world domination not peace between nations.

As for the war in Iraq I also think that is a just war because they attacked us on our soil. I think that is a no brainer. Some people may agree that it isn’t just because we want revenge on them and we want to kill every Iraqi that is on this earth but I disagree with that because if the US wanted to that I quite frankly think they would have done that by now. I think the US realizes that many countries in the Middle East don’t like how we do things here in America and I think the US wants to establish peace between the ME and the US. I do however think the US could have made a better effort in having peace talks with the ME but at the same time they did attack us and we needed to show strength.

I think the Viteman war was not a just war. They never attacked us on our soil they were spreading communism throughout the world and we tried to talk them out of it they wouldn’t listen so we in the end fought which is sort of breaking one of the just war rules.

Jack Dilaura said...

I think that World War II was a just war for a few different reasons. First of all, we tried to negotiate with the Japanese to make peace, but they decided not to negotiate with us. Second, we didn’t declare war until we had already been attacked. We had exhausted all options of peace and going to war was our last resort, so I think that an attack on our national security is a just reason to go to war. I also think that it was very important to get Hitler and the Nazis out of power, so that was another good reason to go to war. I think that it was reasonable to go to war to gain world peace and an end to the Nazi power.
I think that Vietnam, while at the beginning may have been a just war, it ended up not being just at the end. I think the fact that we stayed so long may make it unjust. I don’t understand how after 5 or 6 years the U.S. would still believe that they could have success without losing many more lives. Also, the fact that the U.S. killed many civilians also should make it unjust. In war you shouldn’t have to kill civilians to get your point across.
Finally I think that the Iraq war may also have had just reasoning in the beginning, but by now it is not just anymore. In the beginning I think it was just to want to remove Saddam from power and get his weapons of mass destruction. But I think the fact that by 2003 we still hadn’t found anything shows that it wasn’t just. I think that if the purpose of the war ends up not existing that you should end the war as quickly as possible. I think that a goal should be to lose as little amounts of soldiers as possible

Katie Robinson said...

1.I think that World War II was a just war; it follows all the criteria for just war.
America entered World War II as a last resort. By the time we decided to fight, we had stayed out of the war for as long as we could (although the President was of the opinion that the US joining in the fighting was almost inevitable). We were only compelled to join in the war after we felt that our country was in danger.
The attack on Pearl Harbor was the breaking point for the US. It was when we finally felt unsafe that we entered war with the Axis Powers. I think that this is a very just cause to go to war for: to protect the US and its citizens.
Previous to America joining World War II, the President knew that we would probably have to include ourselves in it eventually and that it would only be a matter of time until the US had to defend itself. Because the President knew that we had to be prepared, he began to get America ready even before we were attacked, so that we could be sure that we would stand a good chance against the Axis Powers when the time came. He made sure that if we engaged in war, we would be able to win.

2.I don’t think Vietnam was a just war. The biggest reason I think that is because of the amount of civilians that were injured/killed due to US tactics. Although I understand why the soldiers did what they did, I still think that because there were so many (intentional?) civilian deaths, the Vietnam war cannot be called ‘just’.
I also think that so far, the Iraq war/War on Terror has not been a just war. However, I wouldn’t know my full opinion until I was able to look back on it. I think that when the wars are over, we will have a better sense of whether or not what the US is doing now can be considered just.

elaina gardner said...

1) World War 2, in my opinion, was a just war from our side. I believe this because the criteria from the bullet points above matches with what World War 2 was. In many ways the war seemed like it was pushed on us. We didn’t have much of a choice so we did what was best for the U.S. The attacks on us were uncalled for and we had a right to defend our country and our side of the war. We were simply doing what is best for our country and we stayed out of it as long as we possibly could until it got to the point that we had no other choice.
2) Vietnam was a just war and it was not a just war. It was a just war because we tried to stop the spread of communism. However, it was not a just war because we didn’t play fair. There were many bad effects from the war like cancer with our soldiers. Also, we were not attacked but we went in anyways. I think that Iraq and the rest of the war on terror started on a just war and turned into an unjust war. It started out as something people were defending and thought was right. And in the beginning it may have been the right thing to do. However, it turned into a war which was, basically, something that is hurting us more than it is helping us. We need to remember why we went into this war and think if the same reasons apply now.

Anonymous said...

i honestly feel that world war 2 was a just war for the simple fact that it wasnt more so a last minute thing but it was the last option the country had.to me this is just war because we were all at peace then all of a sudden we were being attacked by japan.with us being in a situation such as that we really didnt have a choice but to go to war and fight back.many people thought it was shocking when we didnt react to the axis powers but this was something different.i dont think that vietnam was a just war because we more so got our selves involved because we were at peace then we just decided that we would just put our selves in something.i think most of all we could have tried to work something out before making a decision such as declaring war.
china wells (3rd hour)

Anonymous said...

Tyler DeWald

Vietnam would be a good example of not a just war. The reason why the United States went to war in Vietnam was so the country would not go towards communism. It was a bad choice, thousands of people got killed and still the country turned communist. The country was already being invanded by the Sovients, france and china. After the United States invanded the country, we were scared that if one country goes to commiunst all of the other countries will too, called the domino effect. It is a theory, and that is way we should of not invanded Vietnam. Iraq war is a just war because there was an dictor that was killing innocent people and he also had WMD's in 1991, Saddam. He was a powerhouse and he invaded Kwauit for its Oil and we went to save Kwauit but we didn't go take out Saddam till ten years later.

Thurgood McCants said...

Vietnam was definetly a war, because we were fighting for what believe is right, stopping a spread of communism. If other countries gave into communism others would have followes and it would have beem a domino effect like Tyler Dewald said. The last thing the U.S needed at that time was communism.

WW2 was a just war because we really had no other options but to fight Japan, after all they did bomb our navy bases. Also we went in looking for "nukes", and since we didnt find them it was only right we defended ourselves in a war. Now shall we had found thouse "nukes" it would have been a whole other ball game.

Anonymous said...

1.I think that World War II was a just war; it follows all the criteria for just war.
America entered World War II as a last resort. By the time we decided to fight, we had stayed out of the war for as long as we could (although the President was of the opinion that the US joining in the fighting was almost inevitable). We were only able to join in the war after we felt that our country was in danger.
The attack on Pearl Harbor was the breaking point for the US. It was when we finally felt unsafe that we entered war with the Axis Powers. I think that this is a very just cause to go to war for: to protect the US and its citizens.
Previous to America joining World War II, the President knew that we would probably have to include ourselves in it eventually and that it would only be a matter of time until the US had to defend itself. Because the President knew that we had to be prepared, he began to get America ready even before we were attacked, so that we could be sure that we would stand a good chance against the Axis Powers when the time came. He made sure that if we engaged in war, we would be able to win.

2.I don’t think Vietnam was a just war. The biggest reason I think that is because of the amount of civilians that were injured/killed due to US tactics. Although I understand why the soldiers did what they did, I still think that because there were so many (intentional?) civilian deaths, the Vietnam war cannot be called ‘just’.
I also think that so far, the Iraq war/War on Terror has not been a just war. However, I wouldn’t know my full opinion until I was able to look back on it. I think that when the wars are over, we will have a better sense of whether or not what the US is doing now can be considered just.

Christen K.

Anonymous said...

World War 2 is a good example of an unjust war because not only did it not follow the unspoken "rules" of war, but things also got out of hand. The unspoken "rules" are rules such as killing citizens/by-standers and what is considered torture. In World War 2, both militaries' killed not only soldiers, but also regular citizens. Would you want an army coming to America killing everybody? When it comes to the torture part of the war, there were no boundaries. There weren't limits on how far you could go with the torture and what the person deserved. I feel that World War 2 was also a last resort war. Many people probably think we had no other option but war, I think that there are always ways to get around war. In war you spend so much money on weapons and defense, that it hurts the American people cause were the ones paying. I think the government could have tried to make a deal or a peace treaty or something else.

Danielle M.