And although there may be times where the costs of war outweigh the benefits, If that was an act of self-defense, it can be justified. However in most cases, many of these points for war cannot be verified on the spot, together with untold reasons of those wars, end up causing wars that would not have occurred if not for certain misunderstandings. However, there are many real threats that have been and will need to be eliminated regardless of the lives sacrificed. Therefore, I think that war is justifiable with these three requirements, it should be brought forth because of a just cause, done for the greater good, and furthermore when it is an act of
Smith (2003, p. 489) argues that ‘when the lines between knowledge and misrepresentation become completely blurred in the public mind, then education as a practice of civic responsibility becomes very difficult’. Fundamental to the new popular education systems is the replacement of the expected instillation of ‘facts’ to be learned and assessed with a genuine dialogic education (Cole, 2004). Such a dialogic process needs to be distinguished from the postmodernist notion of multivocality where ‘anything goes’ and all that is on offer is deconstruction. Education is closely interwoven with business and industry these days. More than ever, students must perform in a real life context by solving real life conundrums.
The essay provided an outline on each theory before going on to explain the theory’s view on what causes wars. After I evaluated and juxtaposed, it led me to the conclusion that even though there are changing and opposite explanations to answer the question of what causes wars, realism provided the most relevant answer. It seems as if the balance of threat against a potential hegemony has been the most relevant answer as to what causes wars. I can also conclude from this that because states are the primary actors in international relations they will seek to expand their power because they believe it is an essential element in an anarchical
Norman Angell did not believe that economic interdependence would make war impossible, but the author hoped that it would be possible to mobilize the self-interest of merchants and financiers in all countries in support of peace with demonstrating that war is futile and that it would make everybody, even the winner worse off than before. He gave several reasons why war in the modern era is futile. He argued that it is very costly to go to war. He doesn’t only mean in terms of the destruction of people and infrastructure but more importantly of the disruption of trade and financial interests. He says that: “an invasion could only be inflicted by an invader as a means of punishment costly to himself or as a desire to inflict misery”.
Just cause refers to the idea that war must be just in that it has to constitute something more than say simply recapturing something that has been taken or as a punishment for doing something wrong (Just War Theory). Essentially, innocent lives must be in danger in order for war to be the just cause of action. With this in mind, comparative justice takes into account the idea that
Although this excerpt shows that solving conflict with violence is beneficial if you have power over the other party, that is not the case today. With today’s laws, if one tried to resolve conflict using such brute force, they would receive major negative consequences. Essentially, it is not true that violence is the best
The tensions between the U.S. and the USSR after WWII had gradually increased towards a Cold War period. This period without actual fighting had a significant impact on America’s attitude towards the situation in Vietnam. Losing Vietnam to communism would not only threaten the world it would also, maybe more importantly, expose America’s weakness. Whereas the orthodox interpretation praises America for its bravery in their fight to save the world from communism, revisionist’s historians see the Vietnam War as a futile small factor in the larger Cold War Context and criticize America’s actions as aggressive and acquisitive. (21)6America would have the desire to shape the world in its own ideal image.
Sometimes, the reason people enter into war is to get peace for a particular group or undertake a peace to avoid a war. War often ruins everything. Mostly in the end, war will have a negative impact like happened in the World War. However, war does not always threaten peace and end badly for a country. In reality, peace also can result from war, as can be seen in US History, Powhatan have done to make peace between America and England.
More and more people have astonish worked in their fields they research on their fields and bring new era in their fields. Theories, methods, and tools It is difficult to describe the system thinking as compare others.To clarify something based on huge knowledge & investigation. Its also use altos of tools hardware and software to achieve the extensive results. System thinking is well known by its theories, tolls and methods Theories like Catastrophe theory, Cybernetics, Chaos theory, General systems theory, Learning organizations theory, Path dependency theories, Punctuated equilibrium. And methods like Agent-based modeling, Network Analysis, Scenario planning, Systems dynamics modeling.
Globalization is the result of historical development associated with more extensive division of labor and the development of world trade. Therefore, globalization can be called regardless of the will of individuals and even nations process. This process is so vast and sometimes contradictory, that it can not be assessed unambiguously. Globalization as a social process has its advantages and disadvantages, which result in benefits among social groups and the failures - other. Over time, globalization is increasingly complicated, delves into the various sectors of society, brings new rules of behavior and significantly transform the social interaction between individuals or groups.