FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Philosophical Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 11-14-2002, 02:13 PM   #11
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Planet Lovetron
Posts: 3,919
Post

Heathen Dawn:

Quote:
A double negative makes a positive, and war against the unjust is just. Intolerant religions (Christianity, Islam) should not be tolerated.
Would you like to clarify that statement?

I'm a Christian? Does that make me unjust? Would it be okay to kill me? Who gets to decide who is just and who is unjust?
luvluv is offline  
Old 11-14-2002, 02:28 PM   #12
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: U.S.
Posts: 4,171
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by JerryM:
<strong>So I guess you're saying that as long as there is human conflict, there will be war--and each side will find a way to justify it. You may well be
right. So where does that leave us?</strong>
No. The question was "Whats a just war"?

I stated two vague ways in which there might be a just war.

A response was that "The Taliban would undoubtedly feel that their Islamic state was unjustly attacked by the US..." I was merely pointing out that such a fact doesn't change anything.

Obviously the Germans thought their continued war was justified after the Allies started fighting back. This revelation doesn't change the fact that the Allies advance into Europe was justified.

Obviously, if A commmits to war in self-defense against an agressor, then the agressor already believes their actions were justified otherwise they wouldn't engage in them in the first place.

Thus, I don't see the point of the comment I was addressing.

DC
Rusting Car Bumper is offline  
Old 11-14-2002, 03:35 PM   #13
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO.
Posts: 1,100
Post

For DC:

The orginal question was "can war be justified?" (and how should it be waged?) I believe war can be justified, but my point is that any such justification, even though it may be perfectly valid, is also inherently subjective.
JerryM is offline  
Old 11-14-2002, 11:10 PM   #14
Beloved Deceased
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Vancouver BC Canada
Posts: 2,704
Post

So where does that leave us?

Learn to win.
MadMordigan is offline  
Old 11-15-2002, 02:10 PM   #15
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Minnesota, the least controversial state in the le
Posts: 8,446
Post

I take the zen philosophy of fighting: so long as you are unselfish, you may fight if necessary.

To put a finer point on this question, it seems to me that most wars of aggression have 2 components: A greed component, and an emotional component. I think that the twentieth century has shown rather conclusively that war is not profitable for a nation, though it is often still profitable for individuals. The way that they get a war fought is by appealing to the emotions of the individuals in a country. For example. If the conflict between the Israelis and the Palestinians was purely about land, land that had no emotional/religious significance, it could be solved. Land can be bought, people can be compensated, new, denser housing units can be erected, more efficient farming techniques could be used, etc etc. However, it is the feelings of the combatants that keep this struggle raging. Closer to home, the oil and munitions interests, as represented by the Bush administration is exploiting the feelings of fear and anger to further their war goals in the middle east.

Since a just war can be seen as the opposite of a war of aggression, the decision to fight must be made without greed or emotion.
Sarpedon is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:43 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.