English 102
Annotated Bibliography/Proposal
Justifiable War
Is there really such thing as a justified war? If so, what authority has the power to transform the most universally condemned action, killing another human being, into what is not only considered acceptable but encouraged? War is humanity’s most inhumane and destructive element, destroying lives, property, the environment, hopes, and goals, which seem to be just dreams of peace. War unfortunately is a timeless tradition dating back as far as records will show. With so many different reasons wars begin from religious disputes, growing nations quarrelling over territories, as well as civil and revolutionary wars, it seems as though violence is the only determining factor when in reality peace is the only true solution. My paper is not going to focus just on “world peace” because in my mind I feel we are far from that ever happening. Instead I am going to focus on more realistic elements of war, such as when is it considered to be a just or ethical cause to engage a war. Surely if someone invades your homeland and begins killing innocent and helpless people, it would be an exceptional justification to defend yourself, but where is the line drawn. Is it permissible to retaliate after such an attack? Certain offensive wars could be perceived as a protection of rights but who is to judge whether the right intentions are behind the war. And most of all who is to decided who would be considered a competent authoritative figure to declare a war using their best judgment, without being influenced by political scum who care only enough for the betterment of themselves and their views. After watching Howard Zinn’s documentary “The People Speak” and hearing the pleas from families of murdered soldiers to stop seemingly pointless wars to simply avoid further pain and suffering of the innocent, I couldn’t help but do my part in informing myself and hopefully others as to what qualifies as a justified cause for violence.
Bibliography
"Although the Atomic Bombing of Hiroshima Was Justified and Morally Defensible, the Attack on Nagasaki Was Not - Nuclear Weapons." Social Issues - Home. Web. 06 Apr. 2010.
The article is supporting the retaliation against Japan after Pearl Harbor and the planning that went into dropping both atomic bombs.
This article seems to be more of an opinionated justification clearly written by an American, probably while drinking a Budweiser. I needed something of a complete opposite to my argument and I found it. Although we were unjustly attacked first, there is no justifying the utter carnage and mass devastation of civilian lives lost after the dropping of an atomic weapon. No weapon should exist let alone be used and I will use this argument for the justification of such attacks to argue against in my paper.
Barash, David P. Approaches to Peace: a Reader in Peace Studies. New York: Oxford UP, 2010. Print.
“Approaches to Peace” is a broad overview and look into what it would take to come as close to peace as we can. David Barash claims that peace can never be fully achieved, it can only be approached.
“The hard reality is that peace can barely be glimpsed, never mind grasped; what is frustrating, therefore, is not that peace is so close, but that it remains so far away.” (Approaches to Peace pg 1) The author’s viewpoints are similar to my own, saying there is almost no cause for a war and if you truly take extensive peaceful measures there would be no reason to have to try and justify wars. This source is up to date, very relevant, and is going to be a key supporting element in my paper.
Elshtain, Jean Bethke. Just War against Terror: the Burden of American Power in a Violent World. New York: Basic, 2003. Print.
Author Jean Elshtain takes a more in depth approach to whether retaliation on terrorist attacks against civilians is a justifiable reason to declare war. As he describes, it would be irresponsible and a dereliction of duty for public officials to not respond.
This source also supports my argument rather than opposes it. The author claims, in response to the 9-11 terrorist attack, just war tradition should be exercised with justice in mind. This meaning he supports action being taken but solely to prevent further harm and restore preconditions for civic tranquility, these actions being a justifiable casus belli.
Miller, Richard Brian. Interpretations of Conflict: Ethics, Pacifism, and the Just-war Tradition. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1991. Print.
“Interpretations of Conflict” looks more into the Catholic thinking on war and civil conflicts. Attitudes towards violence in Catholic ethics drastically vary depending on whether the unjust is connected with or alienated from the civil order.
This has a slightly conflicting viewpoint from my own. The author states that there is a basic caution used when deliberating official pronouncement of force pertaining to global order, but when dealing with conflict the willingness to use violence is directly related to the cultural or political distance of the unjust. This meaning less discretion of violence will be used if those who are unjust are civil rather than foreign. This texts views may be less current due to the production date.
The People Speaks. By Howard Zinn. Perf. Matt Damon, Morgan Freeman, and Marisa Tomei. 2004.
This is a documentary on Howard Zinn’s book The Voices of a People’s History of the United States. These actors some famous some not, reenact events throughout history and really get the emotional message out.
I accredit this film for inspiring my topic as I listen to a mother read a letter addressed to the public, distraught and unsure of her sons death in the military. She could understand or find a reasonable cause to which he gave his life. She strongly stresses the cease of any unjust war. The author agrees with my position.
Sorabji, Richard, and David Rodin. The Ethics of War: Shared Problems in Different Traditions. Aldershot, Hants, England: Ashgate, 2006. Print.
This author stresses the importance of each culture to understand the traditions of other cultures views on ethics of war, especially which of the party you have a dispute with.
I feel as I compare different cultural traditions to that of Christian tradition, which is said to have to strongest influence on just war, I am going to have many points I disagree with. The author takes in depth looks into the reoccurrence of ethical issues throughout different periods of time and also across different traditions. This book is considerably current and will be a strong resource for my paper.
The Tillman Story. Dir. Amir Bar-Lev. By Mark Monroe. A&E IndieFilms, 2010.
Pat Tillman felt it was the right move to turn down a multi-million dollar NFL contract to join to military after terrorist attacks on his country. While deployed he was killed on duty due to friendly fire and the military attempted to cover it up.
Pat’s mother reminds me of the mother in the Howard Zinn documentary, wondering what goal was to be accomplished by invading Afghanistan. Were they on a mission to maintain security or were they on a path for revenge. Regardless of how he died there is not a lot to show for his death other than his heroism to stand up and fight for what his country asked of him. His mothers argument would support my argument of unjust war.
"The Unjust War Theory." Progressive Theology - Exegete the World! Web. 06 Apr. 2010.
This article is a very detailed argument on how no war is truly justified. I like and support this author because although he/she is adamant about their beliefs they also come to terms with war being an unavoidable problem at this time and strongly express the guidelines for qualified justified war.
This author and I are on a very level field of thinking. It is unrealistic to assume world peace at this time, but also we feel the guidelines for determining just war are far too broad. In some cultures it is considered just to attack if they feel that a preemptive attack is coming for them, which basically means anyone can justifiable attack anyone who feels threatened in anyway. If this was widely accepted it would most definitely be the ultimate downfall of mankind. The only war that should be just is self defense; in which if everyone followed they would be no war. This article will add many supporting arguments to my paper.
