Should War Be Considered By An Adversary?

Niccolo Machiavelli termed the phrase “Does the End Justify the Means” in a 16th century political writings titled The Prince. According to The American Heritage Idioms Dictionary, the term is defined as, “A good outcome excuses any wrongs committed to attain it” (Ammer, 2017). The reasons for war vary from protecting and preserving our freedom, to economic reasons. Should the adage be followed unconditionally in terms of all wars? In the case of the U.S. military, the answer is yes. If our military didn’t feel this way, the U.S. would not be the powerhouse it is today in protecting our freedoms, assisting in economic stability and keeping our nation safe.

War-- a horrific way of justifying our actions and the innocent lives that have been lost, but on the other hand has resolved some of the greatest conflicts in history. Not every issue ever raised in this world is resolved through negotiation and discussion, rather sometimes war becomes a necessity for countries to settle disputes. War is a part of how a society strengthens itself politically, socially, and economically however, ultimately it becomes a country’s abusive use of power.

War can be defined as “an active struggle between competing entities. It’s truly hard to tell who is right or wrong during a war. Both sides are fighting for what they believe in and what is true to their heart. In the end there is always two things promised – destruction and death. These two objects can explain the result in every facet of war from the physical to emotional.

Ever since the days of Mesopotamia from the agricultural revolution, war has been a constant and important part of human life. Over time though, humans have evolved and gotten stronger and smarter which lead to more competition. War from its beginning, has consistently stemmed from the innate sense of evolutionary survival and subsequent competition, thus securing it’s inevitable perpetuation.

War is a horrible thing that comes out of hatred in people’s hearts and produces tragedy around it. War comes and goes but in its path are people who have to suffer through the hardships it brings. Two of the most notable aspects of war is that war is a fight for power and that produces loss of family.

Throughout history, war has always been described as an atrocity and an unnecessary reason for the loss of life. This is not the case. War is necessary for the survival of the economy, the sustainability of non-renewable resources, and the progression of inventions.

‘War’ as defined by Webster’s Dictionary is a state of open and declared, hostile armed conflict between states or nations. Voltaire—the human personification of the Enlightenment period—says the following: “Famine, plague, and war are the three most famous ingredients of this wretched world…All animals are perpetually at war with each other…Air, earth and water are arenas of destruction. Defining war has been a political issue for centuries, and it poses a philosophical problem. Most philosophers will agree on war being a clash of arms, or a state of mutual tension between nations or states, distinguishing it from open rebellions, riots, and personal violence.

In its entirety, to conclude that the government should always turn the other cheek and never resist evil, citizens would be consciously committing themselves to getting rid of not only armed forces, but also the police force and the criminal justice system. Police officers arrest criminals who induce harm or break the law, and may use force if necessary to ultimately place the injustice happening behind bars. This position sets forth an example of governmental authority not turning the other cheek. However, when Christ spoke upon the Sermon on the Mount, did he intend for his command to be interpreted and apply towards the police? Of course, this is not to be the primary way to respond to evil, but evil must be tamed and regulated. God does not want free reign evil to run around in society unchecked, nor do His children. If the argument for police to use force in some instances is accepted, it is therefore legitimate and no objection to be made against the military to use force in some instances

“War may sometimes be a necessary evil. But no matter how necessary, it is always an evil, never a good. We will not learn how to live together in peace by killing each other’s children. This famous quote is from James Earl “Jimmy” Carter, Jr., who served as the 39th President of the United States. It implies that war can be justified under strict circumstances where it can be necessary, but it is still abhorrent. War is defined as a state of armed conflict between different countries or different groups within a country. Justification refers to the action of showing something to be right or reasonable. War brings many negative and catastrophic impacts not just to the country, but to the people living in the country as well, which this paper

The Just War Theory is a doctrine founded by Saint Augustine which has helped bring much discussion and debate to wars and the morality to fight in them. Wars and fights between people have gone on forever and are not perceived to stop anytime soon so it is important that some people thought about when and why they should ever fight. For many years Christians never part toke in this fighting due to teachings of the Bible and Jesus' teaching on 'turning the other cheek' and 'live by the sword, die by the sword'. Saint Augustine would be one of the first to talk about how a Christian could be a soldier and serve God at the same time. Through this thought we would receive the Just War Theory which gave a set of requirements for someone to partake

In Exodus 14, Moses and the Israelites have become sandwiched between the Egyptian military and the chaotic Reed Sea. Yet YHWH’s instruction to them is not to turn and fight, but rather ‘be silent’ (Exodus 14:14). YHWH promised to come and fight on their behalf. Fast forward to Deuteronomy 2:26-35, and we get yet another story of Israel and potential military activity. Regardless of whether you read the text as actual warfare taking place, or that of an ideological battle (of which the argument can be made for), I want to note two things: Moses initially tried to make a peace agreement with King Sihon, of which Sihon refused. In addition, we clearly see that it is Heshbon who attacks Israel, and not the other way around. Finally, coming to the story just before Ai in the Joshua narrative, we are given the story of the siege of Jericho (Joshua 6). In the Jericho passage, we see that YHWH is the voice giving Joshua instruction regarding how they are to enter the city. Despite YHWH’s instruction, there are multiple instances in this text where Joshua technically disobeys the voice of YHWH, of which I would ascribe to the resulting destruction. The reason I bring up Jericho and Heshbon, are because they stand in contrast with the Ai narrative in that, like Egypt and Heshbon, YHWH’s voice was present in the happenings. With Ai this is not the case. Joshua will attack Ai without the voice of YHWH preceding the

The United States dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 in order to bring a swift end to the most bloody war in human history. World War 2 killed millions of people, including over 400,000 American soldiers and civilians. President Truman ordered the attack on Japan because he believed that Japan would not surrender in any other way. However, the use of the atomic bombs led to unnecessary bloodshed, and an alternative solution to the end of the war should have been sought out by the American government.

Did you know that religious leaders that come from religions of peace are starting deadly wars in the name of their God? Leaders like Pope Urban 11 and Muhammad have started wars in the name of their God. There has been about 200,000,000 deaths due to holy wars, so should someone be justified in initiating one? Christian and Jewish religious leaders should not be justified in starting holy wars, proving that if they do start a holy war, it would be going against their religion’s beliefs since both religion’s beliefs are opposed to killing.

Furthermore,war is a state of conflict between different groups that potentially end with death. The action of fighting is used for many untold reasons, none of which are worth fighting for. However, if people could learn how to use their words more effectively, less fighting would take place. War is like a loop it never stops, it continues to go round and round

War has been a major part of the evolution of mankind, every human generation has faced some kind of war but the harsh reality is that although war has its negative qualities, it is also has its advantages: it can resolve political conflicts and lead to peace. But the question I wish to pose is this; is war ever acceptable?