Posted on 09/30/2002 6:23:21 AM PDT by xzins
2. Legitimate Authority. A war is just only if it is waged by a legitimate authority
....a. The US Government is a legitimate authority
....b. The British Government is a legitimate authority
....c. The UN is not a government, and is not a legitimate authority.
3. Redress of Wrong. A just war can only be fought to redress a wrong suffered
....a. 9/11 attacks by terrorists against US.
....b. Iraq harboring (aiding/abetting) Al Quaeda
....c. Circumstantial evidence indicating Iraqi complicity
....d. Iraq currently possessing and active pursuing weapons of mass destruction (wmd) that can be used as clandestine "weapons of mass terror" (wmt).
....e. Legitimate threat does constitute a wrong that need's redressing.
4. Reasonable Chance of Success. A war can only be just if it is fought with a reasonable chance of success
....a. The US can easily succeed against the Iraqi socialist state.
....b. US military power is the greatest in the world.
5. Re-Establish Peace. The ultimate goal of a just war is to re-establish peace
....a. The US has no goal of permanent seizure of territory.
....b. Upon regime change the US will withdraw in order to permit Iraq's re-entry into the community of peaceful nations.
6. Proportionality of Force. States may not use more force than is necessary to attain the limited objective of addressing the injury suffered
....a. Regime change could require a range of military force up to and including high intensity conflict.
....b. The US has no intention of using Weapons of Mass Destruction (wmd) EXCEPT as a response to Iraq's using WMD.
....c. The objective of regime change is specific and attainable in a variety of force configurations.
7. Collateral Damage. The weapons must discriminate between combatants and non-combatants
....a. US laser guided and satellite guided weapons systems can focus on specific targets with a high degree of reliability. Collateral damage will be minimal.
....b. Even if Iraq hides military objectives in civilian areas, the specific target ability of the US will enable limited civilian collateral damage WITHIN the target area and extremely limited civilian collateral damage OUTSIDE the target area.
....c. The US has targeted civilians for food drops, medical assistance, health maintenance, and restoration of civil order. This is the opposite of collateral damage.
At this point in time, the US must follow through on opportunities to avoid war so that it is evident that sufficient efforts have been made to prevent this war.
Other than that, all other requirements for a just war are reasonably answered.
Last Resort...
We must allow another state to murder, main, attack, overrun, rape, pillage, etc, before we arrive at this "last" resort. We must resort to submission to a foriegn power before arriving at a "last" resort of war.
Proportionality...
This is truly stupid. A just war requires that we give our emenies "a fighting chance." Overwhelming superiority saves lives on both sides. A quicker surrender by the offending power saves many lives.
Collateral Damage...
Are soldiers humans? Should we have invaded Japan, costing and estimated 2 million Japanese and American lives (mostly soldiers) instead of bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki (costing 200,000-300,000 civilians?)
Are these Tenets for real????
I assume you have fingers like mine :) and mean "dumb". These originated with Thomas Aquinas (c.1224–March 7, 1274). Aquinas was a Catholic philosopher and theologian, who wrote Summa Theologica. In this work Aquinas used Aristotelian logic to reconcile faith with reason, "proving" the existence of God as the logical uncaused cause. Therefore, many authors correctly fault Aquinas for introducing autonomous Magisterial Reason into Christian Thought. In Pange, Lingua, a hymn for Vespers on the Feast of Corpus Christi, Thomas Aquinas wrote:
Sing, my tongue, the Savior’s glory,
Of His Flesh the mystery sing;
Of the Blood, all price exceeding,
Shed by our immortal King.
This gives us some view of Aquinas' view of God and Christ.
BTTT
Uh,.....and,...NOT to 'Imams'...?
In our discussion today it was stated it belongs to the higest body..whne talking of Somelia..It was the UN that called that action and it was the highest body.
They most certainly did not. They originated with Augustine. Aquinas only expanded Augustine's thoughts on the just war.
Can you supply a reference? Hopefully available from CCEL...
Please do not confuse my attribution of the source as endorsement of the entire thread of argument. Also remember that often quotes here do not have their full context. Recall that most of the writings from this period are in Latin. Many English translations are in the public domain in the CCEL (Christian Classics Ethereal Library) at Wheaton College. Check out www.ccel.org. If you want to critique Aquinas' argument, read the entire section in Summa Theologica at CCEL. Note that jude24 correctly pointed out that Aquinas borrowed heavily from Augustine. The above reference has many quotes. I've asked jude24 to supply some sources to Augustine. A quick Google search did find this attribution to Augustine from Schaff's "History of the Christian Church."
St. Augustine, the noblest representative of the Latin church, in his profound work on the "City of God," excludes slavery from the original idea of man and the final condition of society, and views it as an evil consequent upon sin, yet under divine direction and control. For God, he says, created man reasonable and lord only over the unreasonable, not over man. The burden of servitude was justly laid upon the sinner. Therefore the term servant is not found in the Scriptures till Noah used it as a curse upon his offending son. Thus it was guilt and not nature that deserved that name. The Latin word servus is supposed to be derived from servare [servire rather], or the preservation of the prisoners of war from death, which itself implies the desert of sin. For even in a just war there is sin on one side, and every victory humbles the conquered by divine judgment, either reforming their sins or punishing them. Daniel saw in the sins of the people the real cause of their captivity. Sin, therefore, is the mother of servitude and first cause of man’s subjection to man; yet this does not come to pass except by the judgment of God, with whom there is no injustice, and who knows how to adjust the various punishments to the merits of the offenders .... The apostle exhorts the servants to obey their masters and to serve them ex animo, with good will; to the end that, if they cannot be made free from their masters, they may make their servitude a freedom to themselves by serving them not in deceitful fear, but in faithful love, until iniquity be overpassed, and all man’s principality and power be annulled, and God be all in all.[emphasis mine] from here
Again, note that I am neither endorsing nor refuting this argument. I am just pointing you to some sources so that you can evaluate it for yourself. From your comments, I'm assuming that you are a believer in Jesus Christ. On the basis of that assumption, I encourage you (and all of us here on FR) to critically examine the argument in the spirit of Acts 17:11
Augustine, Contra Faustum Manichaeum XXII.73-79
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.