WAR In IRAQ. “Just-war” Theory. The Iraq war is debatably the most controversial war to ever take place. Most people question its morals, its legality, and if it was the just action to make. The main issue in Iraq is if it was just to invade Iraq without solid proof of nuclear weapons.
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
The Iraq war is debatably the most controversial war to ever take place. Most people question its morals, its legality, and if it was the just action to make. The main issue in Iraq is if it was just to invade Iraq without solid proof of nuclear weapons.
Of course The United States government decided it was the correct thing to do, but almost 70 percent of the citizens disagree with their government on the issue.
There is also the issue if the troops should be brought back home, and if it follows the just war theory. In most opinions, there was not enough evidence to claim Iraq had nuclear weapons, 4 years later we can see this claim was true. America was wrong to invade Iraq because, of the just war theory, lack of evidence, and the disregard for human rights.
For there to be just cause, “there must be a real, lasting, grave, and certain damage inflicted by an aggressor on a nation or a community of nations. In Iraq there was obviously no just cause. Iraq did not attack the United States, and USA did not find any evidence of nuclear weapons.
Comparative justice is “the right and values in the conflict must also be so important they justify killing”. The conflict which has risen in Iraq defiantly does not justify killing. Again there were no evidence nuclear weapons, nor did they start a war with America. Probability of success is, “the odds of success should be weighed against the human cost of war”. Both sides Iraq and America are suffering extreme causalities. Again the war decision does not pass this test; human death is not worth the cause of which they are fighting for.
Proportionality is “the damage to be inflicted and the costs incurred by the war must be proportionate to the good expected”. More damage is being done every day; Iraq has been demolished to a certain extent. There has still been no good which has come out of the Iraq war. There is only last resort once all peace talks have failed and all efforts have failed. I believed this had failed in Iraq; there was only one search for nuclear weapons, and view peace talks. There could have been more effort, but Bush was trigger happy. Immunity of non-combatants simply means that civilians must be spared at all and any cost.In Iraq to date there have been almost 70,000 Iraqi casualties. Obviously this has not been followed; the death toll should be far less.
Proportionality means that minimum force must be used to obtain military objectives to lower damage to civilians and casualties. Again 70,000 Iraqi civilians have been killed, and many parts of Iraq are demolished, so this has not been followed. The last theory of just war theory is right intention; this means “political and military leaders must always see that peace with justice is the only reason for the use of arms”. The intention of the Iraq war is always in question. Many think Bush went into war for oil, or to complete tasks his father failed at. In my views only one of the possible ten are evident in the just war theory, and the one is debatable. This clearly shows in the Catholic view that this war is not just.