Jonathan Granoff – “Nuclear Weapons, Ethics, Morals and Law”
Ron Paul – “Conscription: The Terrible Price of War”
Jonathan Granoff – “Peaace and Security”
War and Terrorism is perhaps one of the hottest topics in the U.S. The debate on whether a mosque should be built two blocks away from ground zero has refreshed people’s memory of the terrorist attack nine years ago. Many people in the U.S. believe that we are in a just war with the terrorists who threat the peace of the world. However, how many classifications can wars be categorized? What kind of war should be permissible? In my opinion, the existence of war is evil and should be limited to the minimum possible level.
First, I want to argue about the justice …show more content…
One frequently used example of just war is when U.S entering World War II. However, the nuclear bombs dropped on Japan definitely violated the principle of jus in bello that “noncombatants should not be intentionally targeted (Boss, 576).” Nuclear weapon is viewed as “the ultimate evil” because it could permanently destroy the ecosystem in a large area. “Not only are they destructive in magnitude but in horror as well (Granoff, 601).” Thus, many people are working at stop using any nuclear weapon. Those efforts currently met two problems. The first problem is the potential threat from the countries that already developed nuclear weapons. As long as a group of people have nuclear weapons, the attempt of some others to develop nuclear weapons will still go on. The second problem is what kind of weapon is considered “not a proportional response to the injury being redressed”? Should we allow the predator drone to vaporize people or the biological weapon that could spread diseases? Where is the limitation of the “humanity” for a war? Is killing one person to protect ten other persons a just behavior? What about killing one person to protect a thousand persons? Loss of lives in wars could hardly be just for any