Lolcislaw said:
After reading Just and Unjust Wars by Walzer , and that what he says about morality of war (in short)
Some believe that only a war of defence can be see as a moral war, and any aggression is a crime against other nation states, because it breaches integrity of the states. (he claims that one side in war is always morally right)
According to communitarians only serious ethnic destruction of the nation (grave evil) itself can justify morally intervention of other states which was the case with Second World War, but then US and UK supported as bad regime in order to defeat Germany.Force must be used as a last resort, after exhausitng every other possible mean, there also must be comparative justice in which gains morally will outweight the damage done to the other nation.
According to Just war theorists Breach of Human rights etc. etc. still is not good enough of a excuse to start war, so they are pretty against Liberal Interventions.
Personally i'm a Realist , i dont reallyt believe in Just or Unjust Wars because those distinctions do not seem to stop wars from happening. Wars are so natural in international order, they are simply an extention of Politics.
Obama's Peace Prize is a massive joke, something that really stopped me from Believing in Nobel Pace Prize, i mean dude that literally did nothing to increase world peace got it, just because he is so popular. I mean the next year they can give it to Putin, Berlusconi or Hu Jintao and i wont be suprised
|
The Nobel Peace Prize has been a joke for over 60 years. Mohandas Gandhi one of the most deserving people ever couldn't even get one posthumously.
