Just America or Just in War? Throughout the decades, history has recorded all the wars in which the United States has participated in. Some may consider that the United States’ participation in foreign affairs may have been cruel, or unnecessary; while in other cases, others find it essential for the United States to fight for the common good. Therefore, philosophers—in the pursuit of justice—have designed methods that dictate how a nation can justly engage into a war, one of this methods being the Just War theory. The Just War theory, invented by Saint Augustine around the 4th century, allows to determine when to initiate a war and the level of violence that is justified (Maiese, 2003). The United States participation in the Korean, Vietnam, …show more content…
The Korean War emerged after the Soviet Union intended to spread Communism around the world; it began with China, following to North Korea, intending to reach the South area. Communism represented a threat to the United States since the latter “prized the concepts of personal liberty and freedom of political organization” (Staff, 2010), while the former aimed a society that followed Karl Marx’s motto: from each according to his ability, to each according to his need. During the Red Scare—national anti-communism movement—the United States saw Communism as a threat, the United States firmly believed that engaging into a war that fought the spread of Communism was for the common good. The Just Ad Bellum principle states that for a war to be just, it must be declared openly by a proper sovereign authority. However, the United States’ participation was not declared by the U. S. Congress, but when North Korean’s intention to take over South Korea were identified, President Harry Truman “ordered naval and air forces into action.” (Greenspan, 2013) The United States just intentions were based on stopping the spread of Communism not only within the nation, but internationally wide. Thus, although the Korean War had many casualties, according to the Jus Ad Bellum principle, the United States’ participation was …show more content…
On January 16th, 1991, President George H. W. Bush publicly announced in the Address to the Nation the United States’ participation in the Gulf War. The Gulf War arose when Iraq accused Kuwait—rich in oil—of keeping the price of crude oil low, demanding it to forgive its thirty billion dollar debt in compensation for the acclaimed conspiracy (Smitha, n.d.). In this announcement, President Bush stated the United States’ just intentions for participating, and its goals. President Bush affirmed that other means to make Iraq leave Kuwait had been tried, but were unsuccessful. Thus, the US’s goal in this engagement was “…to drive [Iraq] from Kuwait by force.” Since the United States sought to fight an injustice: Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait for unbacked accusations, and pressures to forgive a debt, the Jus Ad Bellum theory would approve the United States’ participation in this
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
The Korean War Chart Somebody ... Wanted ... But ... So ... North Korea Wanted to make sure the Korean peninsula into a Communist nation United states and nation Stopped them The Chinese joined the war on the Korean side and pushed the united states and nation back to the 38th parallel line General MacArthur To win china over before they became communist with the soviet union Wasn’t allowed to be a general anymore and he was ordered to stay the 20 mile mark We stayed away from china for the most part and failed to get them to become democracy President Truman To stop soviet expansion , the war, and the spread of communsim Americans didn’t want to go to war The war ended in a statement China To stay in the “safe zone” that way there were no interruptions in their reconstruction They feared that the united states would break into china if the us and south Korean were allowed into war China planned a surprise attack and defeated American troops
As the Korean war was going on, the US’ presidential election was also coming closer, and before long, it was about time to elect a new president. One of the running candidates was a republican named Dwight D. Eisenhower. During his campaign, Eisenhower often criticized the US government’s handling of the Korean war, especially its inability to end the conflict between North and South Korea. Because of his criticism, on October 24, 1952, US president Truman challenged Eisenhower to find his own alternative solution. And in response, Eisenhower announced that if he were to get elected as president, he would go to Korea and handle the situation himself.
The alternative, they feared, would be a war on a much larger scale with Communist Russia and China. In July 1953, the Korean War was over. In all, 5 million soldiers and civilians lost their lives during the war. The Korean peninsula is still divided today, the border is known as the D.M.Z. or Demilitarized zone. Americans involved themselves in these foreign affairs against communism because of the paranoid attitude of McCarthyism.
Encircled by two other major conflicts, World War II and the Vietnam War, the Korean War is often lost to history despite the countless effects it had on various countries. After World War II when Japan surrendered, the Korean Peninsula was finally free from decades of Japanese imperialism; however in the years that followed, more conflict and increased tensions occurred that ultimately led to the start of the Korean War in June 1950, just five years after the end of World War II. While many overlook the impacts of the Korean War, it must be understood and enforced that the war truly did change the course of how many countries governed themselves and the relationships between countries. Not only did the war gain attention in Asia, but also from Western countries, specifically the United States. How did the United States’ involvement in the war most prominently affect both the United States and the Korean peninsula, and secondarily, should it
Just war also frames war in the wrong way and It focuses on a limited conflict. There are long term conflicts to think about before rallying up and setting for battle. “The use of military force to stop the killing in Rwanda would have been, in my view, a just war” (Walzer, Pg. xi). Walzer describes the use of military forces being avoided if possible, but used if necessary.
George H. W. Bush was the 41st president of the United States, serving from 1989-1993. In his inaugural address Bush pledged to use American strength as a “force for good”, hailing a march for democracy and people’s independence. He also aimed to make the United States more eco-friendly wanting to be the “environmental president” and strived to maintain the U.S. as a peacekeeping nation through his foreign policy efforts. Overall it is easy to argue that George H. W. Bush was successfully dedicated to traditional American values and his determination to direct them towards making the United States “a kinder and gentler nation” in the face of a dramatically changing world. President George H. W. Bush was a president of democracy and freedom.
American engaged war to provide aid to South Korea and help them fight off an attack by North Koreans. In contrast, North Korea opted to ignore the UN demand for withdrawal, the Security Council decided to help South Korea repel the invasion. (Stewart pg. 224) Nevertheless, General Douglas-Mac Arthur, the overseer of the post-WWW II, ordered the U.S. armed force to back off the North Koreans at Pusan.
The United States met the criteria of Proportionality. In his speech, Roosevelt addresses that even with possible damage that protected and preventing war is far more important in the long run. He states that “hostilities do exist” and presents that we need to demolish them for the good of the people.
While there are many reasons, we joined the war two important reasons were the fact that we wanted to stop the spread of communism and that we were, and still are, supportive of South Korea and see them as our allies. Communism is the thinking in which the power should be in the hands of the government and not in the hands of the people because the leaders think they know better than the people and are desirous to force their will upon them. In other words, “An economic system based on public ownership of property and control of the methods of production, and in which no person profits from the work of others. ”1 Kim Il-Sung was the leader of North Korea at the time of the Korean War; he believed all of Korea should be reunified under communism.
A combination of doctrines and emotions – belief in permanent and universal crisis, fear of communism, faith in the duty and right of the United States to intervene swiftly in every part of the world – had brought about an unprecedented centralization of decisions over war and peace in the presidency. ”(Schlesinger 208). Playing to the constant fear of communism emerging after World War II, presidents have used that as enough of a justification to send our troops away. Surpassing congress by saying we were in imminent danger and essentially, what
The issue of the Iraq war is still one of the most controversial wars that the United States has ever led. Before the 9/11 attacks, the United States starting a war against Iraq, would have been highly unlikely. In 2003, the United States backed by the United Kingdom, decided to invade Iraq. One of the main reasons that led to this decision was the fact that Iraq was thought to have weapons of mass destruction, which would pose a threat both to the United States of America and, by extension, to the west. Here we are, 14 years later, and the war has had major effects on world politics.
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
Just War Theory has been use for a thousand years, is what Christian ethicists and theologians have used to determine when it is morally acceptable for someone to go to war. Augustine and a few others are mainly responsible for the guidelines to the Just War Theory. He made some assumptions about a Christian citizen’s duty to obey political authority and contribute to the task to the civic life (Clough & Stiltner, 2007, pg. 53). Augustine believed that the only just reason for going to war was to maintain peace. Pacifism believes that the use of military force is never moral.
Centuries later, Saint Thomas Aquinas (1225-74) developed further the concept of just war. He asserted that three things were necessary for a war to be just: (1) The one declaring war must be a rightful sovereign, a legitimate leader; (2) The nation being attacked must deserve it because of some serious fault or injustice; and (3) The nation doing the attacking must have a good intention such as advancing good or stopping evil. More modern treatments of just war have included the ideas that war must be the last resort after all other options have failed, and the means of prosecuting the war must be proportional to the offence of the nation deserving attack.