[thechat] When is it time for war?

[Tara Cleveland]

Bill Haenel wrote:
> Listen to yourselves.
> I was under the impression that in the face of all the stupid, angry,
> aggressive things that are going on in the world right now, the people I
> choose to call my colleagues would be more intelligent, thoughtful and
> forgiving than the general public. I guess I forgot that we are the
> general public.

Sheesh! I know... Please, please, please, can we be a little kinder to each
other. I'm so depressed about what's happening, and I look to this group to
find a reasonable discussion about it. I appreciated hearing everyone's
opinion - both for war and against it - even when I totally disagreed. It
gives (gave) me hope that at least there was somewhere in the world that
could debate the issues in a sane manner. Now I'm just sad.

I think that there are a lot of us here who are really angry or upset or sad
or frustrated, in one way or another, about what's going on in the world.
But, I think all of us want to live in a peaceful world - we just disagree
about how to get there. So can we disagree in a more peaceful way? Please.

> My apologies to all for starting an argument rather than a discussion.
> Please feel free to call it a closed thread if you like.

Don't apologise and don't close the thread. Your questions really made me
think about my own views on the justifications for war.

I wish there just wasn't any war. I wish that the world was a peaceful
place. I wish there wasn't oppression and suffering. I wish there wasn't
greed and dishonesty. But that's not reality.

The only realistic hope is that many wars can be averted through diplomacy.
Currently, the UN is the only global forum for doing so. That's what it was
set up to do, and hopefully will continue to do in some form or other. I
think it needs some major reforms - including a healthy dose of real
democracy. 

But your question was "When is war justified?" and I haven't really answered
that. I guess I'm still formulating an opinion (of sorts). My first thoughts
are that I suppose that defence is justified if a country is invaded or
attacked. But I also don't think that a sovereign country should be invaded
or attacked by another country except in *very* exceptional circumstances:
when it is agreed upon by the majority of the members of the UN (and only
the UN because I think it's the best option we have now - notice I didn't
say UNSC), and only as a *very* *last* resort. If the situation is being
contained (as I believe it was in the case of Iraq) I don't think invasion
is justified - I think that diplomacy still has a chance to work - even if
it takes years and years and years.

I also suppose that war is justified if there is genocide or mass killing of
civilians occurring, but I'm not sure I'd call it war - because I only think
that enough force should be used to stop the violence - and then some sort
of peacekeeping should be used until a longer-lasting peace can be brokered.

I also think that it's very difficult to make these determinations and
decide on principles at a time of war or conflict. People tend to twist
meanings and find justifications in order to legitimise whatever it is that
they want to do at that point in time. I don't think that that serves any of
us in the long run.

As I said, I'm still thinking about all this, but these are my initial
feelings. Please don't anyone yell at me. ;-)

Regards,
Tara