Can war be just? Does anyone know any good theoretical

>>9391911
Can war be JUST

As long as you win.

>why are we slaughtering innocent people for our own gain didn't jesus teach us to love others?
>errr well this war doesn't count because it's 'just' you see

>>9391911
Yes.

File: FaceApp_1492132995367.jpg (131KB, 602x602px) Image search: [Google]

131KB, 602x602px

Some wars must be fought and it is irrelevant whether they are just
read blood meridian

File: breiierb.png (668KB, 646x602px) Image search: [Google]

668KB, 646x602px

>>9391977

File: FaceApp_1492132053461.jpg (70KB, 384x384px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 384x384px

>>9391989
excellent

>>9391911
no

>>9392427
Why not

>>9391911
War for survival is as just as it gets. That involves wars for resources. Don't get memed into giving up resources on basis of need. Social Justice is the matter of utopias.

The obvious preliminary texts on war are Iliad, Odyssey, Old Testament, Herodotus's Histories.
I haven't read any Romans so I can't vouch for any of them, I'm not sure what moral insight Caesar gives.
I'm probably going to read Churchill's books when I decide to cover the World Wars, not sure what else is good from that period but I am confident Churchill is going to be worth a read.

The modern view of war is pretty pathetic and not worth looking at unless you are into cuckolding and international shadow politics.
see >>9391962 (who is no doubt an atheist)

>>9393304
so all war is just?

>>9393610
way to go the the extreme to try to undermine the argument. idiot.

File: stirner4.png (58KB, 636x674px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 636x674px

There's no such thing as justice, my property

>>9393789
Name one (1) unjust war.

>>9393754
>good times bread weak men

>>9391911
Lenin.

File: 1418497811029.jpg (85KB, 804x802px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 804x802px

>>9393822
it was intentionally, dummy

>>9391962
Who is innocent? Who among us deserves to live forever?

File: 2B24774E00000578-3186815-Devastated_Hardly_any_buildings_in_Hiroshima_were_left_standing_-a-96_1438857513539.jpg (244KB, 962x662px) Image search: [Google]

244KB, 962x662px

Was this justified?

>>9396055

>Well do we want to sacrifice about 35,000 of our own men in the proposed invasion of Kyushu and Honshu or do we want to vaporize some Japs?

>>9396055
>>9396072

Arguably a land invasion of Japan would have produced longer and more sustained suffering.

If we want to be utilitarian that is the only argument to be made, and I do think it stands up.

Also, from the creation of the bomb I would argue that its usage was an inevitability. Until it was used there was no cause to fear it.

>>9391911
World Order by Kissinger is a good study of realpolitik in International Relations theory and explains why a war can be justified in defence of the balance of power. You could also look at the speeches and writings of Woodrow Wilson that act as the basis of the Wilsonian School of IR, in which Wilson says war can be justified in the pursuit of world peace.

There is also a section of the Summa Theologica by Aquinas that deals with this from a Catholic perspective - although I only know it through secondary sources, which will probably be more helpful on the matter.

>>9396055
Yes

>>9396073

To be honest I don't feel very sorry for them after everything they did. The Germans treated Allied POWs a lot more honorably and I doubt the Americans would have vaporized them, even if they hadn't surrendered before the bomb would was ready.

The worst thing about the Japs was that their cruelty was completely unprovoked, I can kind of understand why the Russians nailed German civilians to doors, but what did we ever do to Japan?

>>9396055
Was it "right"? Probably not. Was it justified? Yes.

>>9396072
>>9396073
>>9396082
>>9396099
There would not have been a land invasion
The Japs were ready to surrender because of the Soviets
The murricans just wanted to flex their nuclear muscle at the russkis

>>9396077
This is what i was looking for, thank you

>>9396133
>Japs
>surrender
These two words should not be used in the same sentence.

>>9396179
That's how it was

>>9396133
This. The Japs were scared shitless of the Soviets.

>>9396179
Yet they surrendered you Dumbo

Iirc truman, eisenhower or some other important figure at the time that were part of the decision said that there was no need for the 2 bombs, they had information thst the japs were already getting ready to surrender. It was just usa flexing a 'cep against the ussr.

the concept of just war relies on arbitrary values of morality
as objective morality does not exist
war cannot be just
as justice does not exist either

>>9391911
yes

see: repulsing an invasion

>>9396077
>a war can be justified in defence of the balance of power
because wwi went SO well

>>9396186
wikipedo / russo-japanese war

>>9396055>>9396072
>>9396073

Surrender negotiations were already in place after Russia was slated to enter the Pacific Front. We took conditional surrender (please stop bombing our civilians.)
The world saw the bombs as a display of military supremacy, not a necessary tragedy, and is slated as one of the reasons for the Cold War.

File: Arnold-map-Japan-firebombing.jpg (578KB, 2443x846px) Image search: [Google]

578KB, 2443x846px

>>9398182

>The world saw the bombs as a display of military supremacy, not a necessary tragedy

Citation needed.

I mean the firebombing of Tokyo killed roughly the same number of people as Hiroshima, so it's hard to argue that the A-Bomb was some kind of quantum leap in destruction. It was just more convenient to send one B-29 on a raid rather than thousands. If the Americans had to they could have cheerfully annihilated every Japanese city with conventional ordinance, and in fact that's basically what they had already done by 1945.

>>9398219
that just goes to show that it was completely unnecessary to drop the a bombs