Reference no: EM133316557
Assignment:
Respond to the following posts. These responses should help to further the discussion by adding additional comments related to what each student said and perhaps asking questions to help expand on their comments.
Post 1:
There were a lot of aspects from the reading "The Triumph of Just War Theory (and the Dangers of Success)" that I found interesting, and also that led me to more questions. The reading brings up how the theory of just war was created so Christians could fight on behalf of "the worldly city, for the sake of imperial peace" but they had to fight justly and only for the sake of peace, without anger or lust (Walzer, 2002, p. 923). Some people would argue that "just war" was an excuse to make war moral, which seems to be the function of the theory. I would have to agree with this argument. However, I would also have to ask, is there a world in which war isn't necessary? I personally don't think there is, at least not anymore. The just war theory may have been created as an excuse to wage war, but it can and should apply to modern warfare as warfare is now frequently unavoidable.
However, many would argue that it does not apply to warfare in the last century, although it should have. Most see realism as the "reigning doctrine" in the field of international relations and warfare (Walzer, 2002, p. 932). This leads me to ask, how do we step away from waging war through realism due to "national interest"? National interest doesn't equal justice or provide substantial jus ad bellum. How do we establish what is truly jus ad bellum in the modern world?
Post 2:
Something that I wish to bring attention to is the matter of how much the United States finances its military compared to other countries and if that's even necessary. My mom has worked in education for quite some time and has more than enough experience to tell you just how much strain the average American teacher goes through on a day-to-day basis, and a big component of why that occurs is that we live in a society that values its military more than its educators. One might jump to the argument that we may need that much money being given to the military for defense purposes, but as we've discussed in previous weeks the U. S. has a history of offensive practices that were painted as defensive and there are plenty of statistics on how overfunded the military is and where that money would be better served.