In order to answer this question it is first important to determine the fraises “pro-war” and “anti-war”. The term “pro-war” describes an attitude in which war is desired, necessary or justifiable. The term “anti-war” describes the opposite; war is viewed as immoral and is generally opposed and condemned. This paper will argue that there are grounds in the book to support both proposition.…
War brings death and destruction, merciless slaughter and butchery, disease and starvation, poverty and ruin in its wake. Although war may not always be the first answer or the most beneficial, it is an inescapable evil because war has brought the world peace and prosperity while banding people together to fight for a cause. It leads to national growth and solves domestic problems between countries; Injustice and tyranny can be quelled as the aftereffect of war. On the contrary, war includes loss of human life, spreads of diseases, and induces a feeling of anxiety and dismay among communities. The brutal sacrifices that innocent people undergo may not be worth the outcome.…
While many scholars attempted to theorize war in human history, only few were credited for constructing consistent theories on which people could base and further their understanding of war and warfare. Those include Greek Thucydides, Chinese Sun Tzu, and Indian Kautilya all three from 3-4th century BC; Prussian Carl von Clausewitz and Swiss Antoine-Henry Jomini both from 19th century. All of those prominent theorist had a lot to offer and therefore had great influence on our thinking in war, warfare, and strategy. However, Clausewitz’s theory offers more insight if one carefully and purposely studied the “paradoxical trinity” identified in his…
Glory is a movie that reenacts the formation of the first Negro infantry, the 54th Massachusetts, during the Civil War. Led by Colonel Robert Gould Shaw, the volunteer Massachusetts infantry endured grueling training and strict discipline. Under his watchful eye, they slowly transformed from being wild and unruly to proud, courageous, and patriotic soldiers. Although the North believed in the abolition of slavery, many Northerners’ still thought the Negro to be inferior to the White race and did not believe they could fight as well. They were soon to be proven wrong.…
Some may believe that war is a necessity to a countries well-being. However, these people do not seem to take the negative aspects of war into consideration. In the novel Slaughterhouse Five, by Kurt Vonnegut, Vonnegut illustrates that war is something pointless and results in nothing but negativity. There are many quotes used in the novel to try and prove his point.…
Military theory spans centuries of conflict all across the world. As such, military theorists have written in a variety of military climates, varying from the absence of gun powder to the presence of nuclear weapons. However, some military theories are transcendent. Some elements of Sun Tzu and Clausewitz are eternally wise. While their similarities may become universal truths, their differences are equally worthy of study because, it is in the differences where choices are made. Sun Tzu and Clausewitz agreed that war is chaos, military action is a tool for diplomatic goals and, as such, the results of warfare are not final. Their differences lie in how they advocate for waging war. The style and preparations for war contrast. This is where…
-Brimlow talks about the draft and this use of men to promote war. Brimlow himself does not support the concept of supreme emergency. He says, “Let me very clear: even if just war theory is fatally flawed” (Brimlow, 2006, Pg. 69). He talks of the justification of killing and how Walzer speaks of the sacrifice of the innocent being ok in supreme emergency. This is almost a contradiction to what most just war theorists believe in. “This is of crucial importance, because even just war theorist deny that it is ever justifiable to kill the innocent directly and intentionally” (Brimlow, 2006, pg. 69). It seems that he uses this form of contradiction to show how he critiques. Brimlow talks about several events but a particularly problematic event…
Just cause: In my opinion, the United States had no right to go into Iraq based solely on a theory that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. According to the Just War Theory, war is permissible only to confront “a real and certain danger," to protect innocent life, to preserve conditions necessary for decent human existence and to secure basic human rights.…
W. Averell Harriman as his ‘personal representative for such talks,’ asking Harriman to ‘search for peace.’” The North Vietnamese agreed to meet at the peace talks.…
Historically, war has been the leading solution for solving conflicts globally. Though combat tactics have become increasingly more sophisticated over many centuries. The ability to affect and change the world through war stayed the same. All the while, the mentality of the public has become increasingly dissociative, and people have less interest on a large scare. From World War I until now, war has constantly evolved, and support has constantly fluctuated.…
What justifies war? Who justifies it? Why as human beings do we feel the need to fight, harm, and kill others to achieve certain goals? These questions have been pertinent to our society since the beginning of time and continue to challenge us to better understand the human psyche, and code of ethics that give Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Coast Guardsmen, and Marines credence to kill in the name of the United States of America. These ethics of war lay the foundation for that code of understanding and righteousness for when it is justifiable to pull the trigger and take the life of another, or commit an act of war.…
I read the Art of War during my high school year as a outside of the class reading book assigned by my language art teacher. I told him I was going to major in business (marketing). So when I first started reading the Art of War I was like “hey, if I have all the time in this world I could have think of all of these stuffs.” I had a big ego that time. Then I had a discussion about the Art of War with my physics teacher(he’s a genius literally, speaks 7-8 languages, mid twenties, doing his PhD. and also teaching). I asked him about the book why this is the knowledge in this book is something I could have think of. He replied something like this: “all the knowledge in this level are like this. It’s may not seem very deep and intriguing to me. However, let a hundred people read this book. They will all interpret differently. It is as if an exotic ingredient waiting to be made into some ridiculously complex dishes. Each chef will make them differently. Depending on the chefs’ expertise. That is why it the knowledge has been used in the business field for decades. To a common people they may think “hey, I could have thought of these stuffs” but they could never improvise those knowledge into practice. That is what separates the people reading this book. Sun Tzu may write quite simply in sentences, but it’s all the interpretation of each individual to put into practice that makes the book so powerful.” To say the least a big part of my ego has been removed. I have never thought of such common thing to be this powerful.…
When is war acceptable? That is the question that the Just War theory (jus bellum iustum) attempts to answer. Guided by an evolving set of criteria, this tradition attempts to provide a framework by which the both the reasons for a war and the combatants' behavior may be judged to be ethical and morally justifiable. This theory or doctrine, has roots in both philosophical and historical contexts, having been shaped by conventions and rules observed through ages of war as well as the thoughts of philosophers of those same ages. These principles are divided into two parts: 'the right to go to war' (jus ad bellum), which concerns itself with whether it is justifiable…
Humanity always resolved their conflicts with one another with various weapons. The only difference is as over time, so do the methods of combat. Warfare is wrongfully defined as "the process of military struggle between two nations or groups of nations; war." (Warfare). This untrue definition induced many to wrongfully assume that only one type of warfare exists; Leading to believe it only happens on the battlefield during a war between countries. The actual definition of "warfare" doesn't imply military action or combat limited to only soldiers, yet it's defined as a direct act of aggression that ends with individuals emotionally or physically scarred.…
In today's society, the possession and effective use of force is necessary. We have to recognize that we live in an imperfect world where evil seems to be an inevitablity. Our constant need for power makes the idea of a violent free world unimaginable. As long as we continue on this power hungry path the political issues will continue on this same path. Force is necessary with our current societal conditions and can be looked at as irresponsible when a nation does not prepare for the necessity of force. Any political conversation that entails the words, truth, liberty or peace run hand in hand with the use of force to create them. The perspective of some people are…