Sign In
Not register? Register Now!
Pages:
1 page/≈275 words
Sources:
No Sources
Style:
Other
Subject:
Social Sciences
Type:
Coursework
Language:
English (U.S.)
Document:
MS Word
Date:
Total cost:
$ 5.83
Topic:

Annotation on Just and Unjust Wars: A Moral Argument with Historical Illustrations

Coursework Instructions:

In this collaborative reading assignment, you will review and discuss "Just and Unjust Wars: A Moral Argument with Historical Illustrations" by Walzer with your peers using the Perusall tool.

Read the document and annotate it as desired (you may use Perusall to ask questions about the document and gain insight from your peers).  As you peruse this document, consider the following prompt:

  • One question often not considered by military planners is the justness of a conflict.  That seems to be outside the military’s purview but is, in fact, central to our understanding of self, the military, and the place of war in society.
    • As you read through Walzer’s work, what is the utility of considering the concept of a Just War?
    • Do you consider it a dated or unworkable concept or does it still have a place in modern warfare?
    • Does the concept work, as is elsewhere noted in the module, with emerging technologies such as drones and cyber warfare; as in, have we technologically advanced beyond the concept? 

NOTE: It is not required that you answer this prompt in your posts; however, you should consider it as you read and annotate the text.

To earn full credit for this assignment, you must make a minimum of 7-8 thoughtful posts to Perusall.

Note: I do not need a write up. I need you to make comments on the document i sent you. You need to copy and paste the pdf in word in order to make comments unless you can make comments on the pdf directly. I wrote in the instructions that "Read the document and annotate it as desired" and the document must be marked up with your comments and at least 7-8 thoughtful comments/posts that equates something like 300 words total for this assignment. Thank you!

Coursework Sample Content Preview:

The Realist Argument
Student name
Institution
Professor
Course
Date
The Realist Argument
Realism is the issue. The defenders of silent loges claim to have discovered an awful truth: what we conventionally call inhumanity is simply humanity under pressure. War strips away our civilized adornments and reveals our nakedness. They describe that nakedness for us, not without a certain relish: fearful, self-concerned, driven, murderous. They aren't wrong in any simple sense. The words are sometimes descriptive. Paradoxically, the description is often a kind of apology: yes, our soldiers committed atrocities in the course of the battle, but that's what war does to people, that's what war is like. The proverb, all's fair, is invoked in defense of conduct that appears to be unfair. And one urges silence on the law when one is engaged in activities that would otherwise be called unlawful. So there are arguments here that will enter into my own argument: justifications and excuses, references to necessity and duress, that we can recognize as forms of moral discourse and that have or don't have force in particular cases. But there is also a general account of war as a realm of necessity and duress, the purpose of which is to make discourse about particular cases appear to be idle chatter, a mask of noise with which we conceal, even from ourselves, the awful truth. It is that general account that I have to challenge before I can begin my own work, and I want to challenge it at its source and in its most compelling form, as it is put forward by the historian Thucydides and the philosopher Thomas Hobbes. These two men, separated by 2,000 years, are collaborators of a kind, for Hobbes translated Thucydides' History of the Peloponnuidn War and then generali:ied its argument in bis own Leviathan.It is not my purpose here to write a full philosophical response to Thucydides and Hobbes. I wish only to suggest, first by argument and then by example, that the judgment of war and of wartime conduct is a serious enterprise.
Melian Dialogue
The dialogue between the Athenian generals Cleomedes and Tisias and the magistrates of the island state of Melos is one of the high points of Thucydides' History and the climax of his realism. Melos was a Spartan colony, and its people had "therefore refused to be subject, as the rest of the islands were, unto the Athenians; but rested at first neutral; and afterwards, when the Athenians put them to it by wasting of their lands, they entered into open war."'
This is a classic account of aggression, for to commit aggression is simply to "put people to it" as Thucydides describes. But such a description, he seems to say, is merely external; he want, to show us the inner meaning of war. His spokesmen are the two Athenian generals, who demand a parley and then speak as generals have rarely done in military history. I.et us have no fine words about justice, they say. We for our part will not pretend that, having defeated the Persians, our empire is deserved; you must not claim that having done no injury to the Athenian people, you have a right to be let alone. We will talk instead of what is feasible and what is necessary. For this is what war is really like: "they that have odds of power exact as mu...
Updated on
Get the Whole Paper!
Not exactly what you need?
Do you need a custom essay? Order right now:

You Might Also Like Other Topics Related to war essays:

HIRE A WRITER FROM $11.95 / PAGE
ORDER WITH 15% DISCOUNT!