Meikko Jay D. Forones POLS 411 – Solving the Puzzle of War _______________________________________________________________ In the first chapter of John Vasquez (1993) book entitled “The War Puzzle” he attempted to conceptualize war through accumulating major findings from the existing war literature ranging from Clausewitz to modern behavioralists and ethnologists. He is struck by the overreliance on "realist" or power- based explanations of war, and seeks to balance the equation by conceptualizing war as a learned group process consisting of various actions, reactions, and foreign policy missteps over key issues such as territoriality, taken in the context of international rules and institutions. Accordingly, the definition of war is a result of the language we use to describe it, which is a result of our previous knowledge. There are many definitions of war that Vasquez tried to analyze in order to come up with his conception of war. Amongst other existing definitions of war, he prefers Hedley Bull’s (1977) definition: “War is organized violence carried on by political unit against each other.” Although he has made it clear that even working and operational definitions make theoretical assumptions that may distort the world, he has avoided beginning this inquiry with an explicit theoretical definition.
Through our research we discovered many benefits to mankind that this “holy war” produced. Ultimately we came to the conclusion that, War is a necessary evil to help progress human advancement in many areas, the spread of ideas from one culture to another, and the advancement of women in society. To completely understand our thesis and how we came to it we decided to provide some of the information and background on the Crusades before we delve into our reasons for coming to the thesis that war is necessary. There were a total of eight Crusades, and the first took place from 1095-1101. The last Crusade, the eighth, took place in 1270, so in essence, the Crusades lasted from 1095-1270.
But was it a "just war," an "unjust war" or some combination of both? This paper will try to answer that question. Before we can apply the principles of just or unjust war to the struggle in America in the 1860s, we have to find out what the terms mean. They are philosophical, and people have been wrestling with them since ancient times. War itself has a very specific definition, which it is useful to mention here because we have to know what war is before we can determine whether or not it is just.
Even though Ancient Rome adapted to Ancient Greece laws and rules, Ancient Rome wrote in Latin to create their own literature. Satirize was used to make fun of Ancient Rome society. Roads, bridges, and tunnels were all advanced in Ancient Rome. Astronomy became large after a roman scientist named Ptolemy discovered that the earth was the center of the universe. Ancient Greece contributions helped the Western Society today.
There are a number of different approaches of the causes of war. Descriptive approaches, according to historians’ opinion, is likely to focus on a specific, direct causes of the outbreak of war. Another theoretical approaches, according to many political scientists, tend to focus on the search for general explanations, diversified and influenced factors about why wars break out. In different levels of analysis, the breakout of war can be explained by different causes. In the individual level, theories about war focus on rationality.
At first glance it seems unreasonable to distinguish between just and unjust wars because we may think that all war is unjust in itself. However, there are many thinkers such as Kant, Hegel, Walzer, Heller, Pufendorf, Kelsen, among others, who have tried to legitimize or delegitimize certain armed conflicts. Some thinkers tried to defend the justice of war by believing that when legitimate defense is at stake armed conflict can be considered as fair. Others condemned war as unjust when the only purpose behind it was to conquer or attack the enemy. For both cases, there is a right that we have to take into account, the right of all individuals to preserve their own life.
“Examine what is meant by a Just War and Pacifism” A just war is a war, which religious believers may fight in under certain conditions. While life may be sacred, at times killing in war may be justified. Pacifism is the belief, which may or may not be religious that killing in war may not be justified. The Just War came from the Romans in the times of early Christians who were pacifists. However they needed to fight and therefore they decided to create rules in order to have a fair war which they were able to fight in such as having a legitimate authority to authorise the war and a justified cause which initiates the war.
CAN A EVER BE JUST? Many argue whether a war could be justified or not. In my essay I will be discussing whether it's justifiable or not. A just war is war waged according to moral rules defined by St Augustine and St Thomas Aquinas.The conditions for a just war are 1. the war must only be started and controlled by the authority of the state or the ruler, 2. there must be a just- cause;those attacked are attacked because they deserve it, 3. the war must be fought to promote good or avoid evil. Peace and justice must be restored afterwards.
Rabelais’ work is a far cry from the earnest moral and educational programs of the early humanists. The fact that these stories present a deep learning of scholarly, literary and scientific thoughts, even in parodied circumstances, still demonstrate a great degree of humanist thinking. In the first passage, the reference to Gargantua learning “relevant passages of Pliny, Athenaeus, Dioscrides, Julis Pollux, Galen Porphryius, Oppian, Polybius, Heliodorus, Aristotle, Aelian and others” eludes to his education of Greek scholars. Rabelais is quick to mention all these names as a narrative trick that boasts his own knowledge of these Greek scholars and in such a way,
Governments of countries for example often had to keep their peoples under control participating in the war and having mixed feelings/ opinions of the war. As front lines are filled with trenches interactions in this case refer to several things such as gunfire, bombing, and shouting of orders. These examples fall under the first category of Battles and are either physical or verbal. Throughout the war, diplomacy was an advantage to the allies. For example when faced with heavy casualties and problems at home, Russia withdrew from the war and instead the United States entered brining much needed support and troops to help win the war.