Political Crossfire Forums

[ZeroTolerance]

These are 5 main principles in the jus ad bellum law, part of the "just war theory" the United States has employed for the majority of the last century. As well, they are a very general set of parameters to abide by regarding invasion/intervention. Seems as though current neoconservative foreign policy falls outside even these general parameters.

Comparative justice- Questionable.
Competent authority to act- Highly questionable.
Right intention- Highly questionable.
Probability of success- Highly questionable.
Last resort- No.

Of course, this is my opinion. I do find this very interesting, as realists and idealists alike apply Iraq to just war theory in different ways, and interpreting jus ad bellum in different ways.

[GTTofAK]

I don't think the US has ever employed the Just war theory. Especially considering that your 5 main principles were codified by the US Catholic Conference in 1993.

[thefranzkafkafront]

Just war theory is laughable. (You've also slighlty got the imperatives out of whack.) Namely becuase the second principle of Jus ad bellum is "Legitimate authority" which considering the theory was largled comparised by Aquinas, is frankly a joke.

Legitimate authority circa mid medevial peroid.

Its also highly subjective, a pro war person could take all of thouse points and turn them into a yes.

Finally is a catholic theory only applies to catholics, the U.S is a secular republic.

[Mr. Sunshine]

ZeroTolerance wrote: These are 5 main principles in the jus ad bellum law, part of the "just war theory" the United States has employed for the majority of the last century. As well, they are a very general set of parameters to abide by regarding invasion/intervention. Seems as though current neoconservative foreign policy falls outside even these general parameters.

Comparative justice- Questionable.
Competent authority to act- Highly questionable.
Right intention- Highly questionable.
Probability of success- Highly questionable.
Last resort- No.

Of course, this is my opinion. I do find this very interesting, as realists and idealists alike apply Iraq to just war theory in different ways, and interpreting jus ad bellum in different ways.

Korea, Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, Somalia, Afghanistan, and Iraq twice. Your litmus test is completely contrary to our own Foreign Policy. :rofl:

[bigstick61]

Also, Nicaragua, Haiti four times, Mexico twice, Russia (versus the Bolsheviks), the Dominican Republic twice, Cuba four or five times, Panama another time (when it was still part of Colombia), China (for a long period of time, although much more limited), Kosovo, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and possibly a couple more which I'm missing. All small wars conducted in the past century (the Phillipine Insurrection does not count, as it was part of the US at the time of the conflict).

[bob.appleyard]

Just War was only invented so that Christians (who were initially pacifists) could support wars, and thus allow Christianity to be the religion of the Roman Empire.