Final

I’m also going talk where does the church stand on the topic of war. There are lots of debates on war whether it a good thing or an awful thing on the face Of the earth. so the controversy behind this topic that some people believe that you can achieve a common good by going to war. By that mean war help out the economy, For Example in 1930’s The Great Depression was happening and World War II brought jobs that caused The Great Depression to end. The Other group of people believe that going to war is completely wrong, that you will not achieve anything and make the ituation worst.

For Example, pretend the rebel took out the angry dictator, the country’ will be unsettled with no government or Constitution. Post World War II, The United Nations (UN) is an intergovernmental organization established 24 October 1 945, to promote international co-operation. A replacement for the ineffective League of Nations, the organization was created following the Second World War to prevent another such conflict. Most of the time War violate human rights, For Example in World War Two there was a Jewish Genocide. Acts of genocide violate the most fundamental nd broadly accepted principles of human conduct.

The World Wars, and the huge losses of life and gross abuses of human rights that took place during them, were a driving force behind the development of modern human rights instruments. The united Nations has played an important role in international human-rights law since its creation. The United Nations discovered a human right which is any use of chemical weapons is violate human conducts. Do you know that In World War I Conscription was in the law, that mean you can be force to go to war and fight for your country.

Now it’s not mandatory to join the army to fight for your country. The Interpersonal dimension is anyone can be involved in a war whether it is a country or a group or even the government. Carl von Clausewitz a philosopher that did philosophy work about war. Examines the teleology of war: whether war is a means to an end outside itself or whether it can be an end in itself. He concludes that the latter cannot be so, and that war is caused by politics. In this we are going to justify, why war is always be morally wrong and whether war can be justified. War is never fought for peace.

It’s all about politics; war is an actual, intentional and widespread armed conflict between political communities. Also Karl von Clausewitz states: “Politics is the womb in which war develops”. War perhaps is considered to be initiated for the national interest achievement by aggressive regimes including states and it does not matter whether the state is a dictator, democratic, fascist or even Islamic Republic system. I think war for state interest or holy wars are totally and morally wrong. You also know the fact that war seems to be the most destructive and horrific type of human interaction.

No other venue allows people to kill each other in such massive numbers or to cause such incredible and widespread suffering. Wars often take years to develop, can last for years longer, and the effects reverberate for decades if not centuries. There is no winning or triumph in the war. Both parties suffer. War is a ruthless and horrible enterprise. And seriously, who has set the victory limits and lines? Is victory what U. S military operations did in the 21st century? Ending up in thousands and perhaps even over a million people casualties and with tens of thousands ore wounded, the question deserves consideration.

In World War II, the U. S used an atomic bomb against the cities Of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan at the final stage of World War II. The Impact was a giant disaster more than 2 million died right on the spot. Almost 60% died from flesh or flame burns, around 30% from falling debris and 10% died from something called radiation sickness. Imagine how would you feel, when you are burnt alive? Under what circumstances can we say that a nation is justified in waging war? Human beings are gifted with reason, and reason recognizes a moral obligation not o kill other human beings.

The Main issue is war, it is generally characterised by extreme violence, social disruption and an attempt at economic destruction. War should be understood as an actual, intentional and widespread armed conflict between political communities, and therefore is defined as a form of political violence or intervention. Now the ethics of war and peace are three traditions of thought dominate the ethics of war and peace: Realism; Pacifism; and Just War Theory Firstly, The Just War Theory is probably the most influential perspective on the ethics of war and peace.

Many credit Augustine with the founding of just war theory but this is incomplete. Many credit Augustine with the founding of just war theory but this is incomplete. Just war theory can be meaningfully divided into three parts, which in the literature are referred to, for the sake of convenience, in Latin. These parts are: 1) which concerns the justice of resorting to war in the first place; 2) which concerns the justice of conduct within war, after it has begun; and 3), which concerns the justice of peace agreements and the termination phase of war.

Secondly, Realism is most influential amongst political scientists, as well as scholars and practitioners of international relations. Realism, by contrast, sports a profound skepticism about the application of moral concepts, such as justice, to the key problems of foreign policy. Power and national security, realists claim, motivate states during wartime and thus moral appeals are strictly wishful thinking. Lastly, Pacifism does not share realism’s moral skepticism. For the pacifist, moral concepts can indeed be applied fruitfully to international affairs.

It does make sense to sk whether a war is just: that is an important and meaningful issue. But the result of such normative application, in the case of war, is always that war should not be undertaken. Where just war theory is sometimes permissive with regard to war, pacifism is always prohibitive. For the pacifist, war is always wrong; there’s always some better resolution to the problem than fighting. So an Example for war is all about politics is the Syrian Civil War. It stated in 201 1 and the war is about the Syrian Regime (government) vs the Free Syrian Army (opposition against the government).

The Church teachings bout war is the fifth commandment forbids the intentional destruction of human life. Because of the evils and injustices that accompany all war, the Church insistently urges everyone to prayer and to action so that the divine Goodness may free us from the ancient bondage of war. Also The Catechism of the Catholic Church say Every act of war directed to the indiscriminate destruction Of whole cities or vast areas with their inhabitants is a crime against God and man, which merits firm and unequivocal condemnation.

A danger of modern warfare is that it provides the opportunity to those who ossess modern scientific weapons especially atomic, biological, or chemical weapons – to commit such crimes. The Church Strongly Disagree with any action of war. The alternative to war is peace which can be debate on what the government can to prevent a war and getting the country to be a better place, is that even why even have a government to keep the country settled and make the country better. There won’t be any consequence if there is no war, but if there was a war, the consequence are huge such loss of civilian and many more.

The cons of war People die in wars, sometimes by the illions. Buildings, farms, cities and sometimes entire regions are damaged beyond recognition by the weapons of war. Families are broken apart as members are called into du¶/, leaving the remainder to stay home and wait for their return. The Pros to war is difficult to defend, much less endorse, an activity whose sole end is to assert dominance through death and destruction, there are aspects of war that are positive such as war can be required to end oppression.

War can never solve any situation there is always an aftermath. For Example, In Africa’s 24 countries suffering 81 conflicts, now imes the countries with conflicts and then see the consequences of war on the daily casualties, hunger, child labor, lake of resources, poison air that they breathe, environment and many more. Do you want to go to war to achieve this, to justify this? We do not need to resort to war in order to protect people and punish aggression effectively.

This Also Relate Back To one of the ethics of war which is pacifism identify themselves as “anti-war-ism”, by that they mean we should sit hand on hand and recite war is always morally wrong thus we won’t fight and war won’t help the county suffering. This issue is mportant because war still happens today around the globe and people die, innocents die because the country couldn’t do any justice. Also it can teach us that war is not right should never be case to achieve something.

The law of war is a legal term of art that refers to the aspect of public international law concerning acceptable justifications to engage in war and the limits to acceptable wartime conduct. Modern laws of war address declarations of war, acceptance of surrender and the treatment of prisoners of war; military necessity, along with distinction and proportionality; and the prohibition of ertain weapons that may cause unnecessary suffering. The Conscience and discernment behind this topic is that we should do the right thing and not go to war.

Mainly because War is never fought for peace, it’s all about politics; war is an actual, intentional and widespread armed conflict between political communities. What should be done is not to do war, Instead of war you should do peace or agreements, without violence. My Preferred opinion is agree that war is always morally wrong and it can never be for justice. believe that war is never an option, because look at as Christian perspective, God put us on the earth as Human Beings for a reason and that reason definitely not to kill other human beings.

A thinker studied this semester will make the right decision and agree that war is morally wrong and you can’t achieve anything, just killing people which is bad. Also the thinker can relate to Gandhi or Aristotle they say war is always found to be immoral and war doesn’t seek to find the good. This Essay is meant for people to know ethics behind the war and why it is wrong, to teach war is never the option. There is always better actions to do ather than war such as sign off and agreement.