Dear Christian Forums,
I have a question about Just War Theory. Often the following are hailed as conditions for a just war:
I have a few questions regarding them.
''All aggression is condemned; only defensive war is legitimate.''
What is aggressive and what is defensive? Must you personally be attacked in order to be a defensive actor? What if you see injustice and decide to join an effort in order to stop that unjust? Would it be wrong for states or non state actors to for instance join an effort against Nazi Germany even though Nazi Germany does not constitute a threat against them personally? Would it be wrong to support or join opposition to immoral regimes even though they do not constitute a threat to you yourself?
''Since the use of military force is the prerogative of governments, not of private individuals, a state of war must be officially declared by the highest authorities.''
Why are states only recognized as legitimative authorities? Often nations are born out of non state actors such as guerillas. These guerillas later become states. I do not see why states need to be the only form of legitimate authority. What about non state people collaborating to overthrow their own government because it is very bad. These individuals if successful become the state itself. What about people collaborating from other countries to overthrow other governments. Would it be wrong for South Korean or individuals from other nationalities to go to North Korea and organize a resistance movement wherein they free the political prisoners from prison camps for example? I just disagree with the fact that only states hold the right to violence.
Also when does violence become a war?
Thank you,
Fortunecookie
I have a question about Just War Theory. Often the following are hailed as conditions for a just war:
I have a few questions regarding them.
''All aggression is condemned; only defensive war is legitimate.''
What is aggressive and what is defensive? Must you personally be attacked in order to be a defensive actor? What if you see injustice and decide to join an effort in order to stop that unjust? Would it be wrong for states or non state actors to for instance join an effort against Nazi Germany even though Nazi Germany does not constitute a threat against them personally? Would it be wrong to support or join opposition to immoral regimes even though they do not constitute a threat to you yourself?
''Since the use of military force is the prerogative of governments, not of private individuals, a state of war must be officially declared by the highest authorities.''
Why are states only recognized as legitimative authorities? Often nations are born out of non state actors such as guerillas. These guerillas later become states. I do not see why states need to be the only form of legitimate authority. What about non state people collaborating to overthrow their own government because it is very bad. These individuals if successful become the state itself. What about people collaborating from other countries to overthrow other governments. Would it be wrong for South Korean or individuals from other nationalities to go to North Korea and organize a resistance movement wherein they free the political prisoners from prison camps for example? I just disagree with the fact that only states hold the right to violence.
Also when does violence become a war?
Thank you,
Fortunecookie