Pacifisim vs. Realism Essays

In a war, innocent people will die. It cannot be helped. Although bombing runs may kill innocent civilians, they must be done. For example, a school with 50 children in it is located next to a Taliban bomb factory. The U.S. should blow up the bomb factory even if it means that the 50 children will die. This is because the bombs that are produced in the factory can be used to kill many more than 50 people. These deaths are justified because a greater good will come from the destruction of the factory. Until it is feasible for a war to be fought where no innocent people will die, these civilian deaths are justified because a greater good will come from the destruction of a threat to a greater number of people.

Have you heard about Korean War, which occurred in June, 25, 1950? The conflict between ideologies caused this war with tens of millions killed, millions of families separated, the country reduced to rubble, and a huge permanent scar on Korea’s culture. Then, Vietnam War, Gulf War, or Iraq war can sound familiar to you. Let’s change point to the number of dead bodies from wars themselves. Can you guess how many people got killed during all of those war periods? Only for Vietnam War, the true civilians of Vietnam War were two millions in the north, and another two millions in the south, and military causalities were 1.1 million killed and six hundreds thousand wounded during war. To finish a war, how many innocent people and soldiers have

Pacifism covers an array of views and there are many subcategories of pacifism, some of which I will cover, but the main definition of the word pacifism is the opposition to war and/or violence. Perhaps the most famous use of the word pacifism is found in the “Sermon on the Mount”, where Jesus claims the “peacemakers” are blessed. In this passage, the Greek word eirenopoios is translated into Latin as pacifici, which means those who work for peace. One common and simple argument for pacifism among religious groups or god fearing people is the argument that god’s revealed words says, through the bible, “Thou shalt not kill.”

How can a war be truly just? Even if the war begins with good intention, innocent people can be harmed or killed and their property and land destroyed. Many people feel that all violence is wrong while there are many who accept war as the only option in a particular circumstance. For example, many people who joined the First Crusade felt as though they were doing the right thing. After all, Jerusalem was the home of Jesus, so Christians felt the fight was justified.

A war that is justified is still a war, and no one wants to be in that kind of hell. The idea that the only way to win is to be the best at killing people so you can stop killing people and go home, is a way to survive. However, the rules keep changing and you are still there,

One of the components of war that make it justful is that the cause of the war must be just. In other words, the attacking country must inflict lasting, grave, and certain damage for it to qualify as just to fight back. Also if basic human rights are being violated by a group of people then it is just for another entity to decide to go to war to free the victims of the inhumane aggressors and their torments upon the innocent human beings.

I started off the semester thinking I was one of the best writers out there. I scored higher than most on the English portion of the ACT and even passed EH 101 with a ninety-nine, yet EH 102 was like a punch straight to my pride. Always the pacifist, I preferred my arguments to be snide comments under my breath instead of a series of well thought out opinions on paper. Even worse, I had always struggled with avoiding work instead of actually doing it. When EH 102 promised to teach me how to use rhetorical knowledge appropriately, think critically about all kinds situations, maintain a general writing process while creating and editing an essay, use knowledge of conventions to write to different audiences using different genres, and

Most pacifists are committed to finding new and imaginative methods of conflict resolution. “The Quakers”, for example, are a Christian group who are famous for their pacifist stance. This is not a doctrinal tradition and there is no rule to say that Quakers must not fight under any circumstances, they have chosen to follow this path, as they have done for over 300 years. Quakers believe there is something of God in all people. They believe that more can be accomplished by appealing to this capacity for love and goodness than can be hoped for by threatening punishment or retaliation. Instead of harming and killing, they us “spiritual weapons” – love, truth, imagination and laughter – weapons that heal, not destroy.

Ernest Hemingway once said, “Never think that war, no matter how necessary, nor how justified, is not a crime.” There has been many wars throughout history that innocent people or victims have suffered from. A well-known example is World War II, where the Jews or anyone who helped the Jews got tortured and killed in the concentration camps, because Adolf Hitler and the Nazis blamed Jews for everything like losing World War I and economic crisis the country faced. Hitler scapegoated them for the country’s issues and made them “pay” for it. In my opinion, this is the kind of war that are extremely inhumane and “dirty”. The Dirty War of Argentina and Chile was a very dark time in Latin American history.

As explained by William Hawk in his essay “Pacifism: Reclaiming the Moral Presumption”, the pacifist is a person that refuses to participate in war for in any circumstance for two reasons; the grounding belief that war is wrong, and the belief that human life is sacred and invaluable. Many pacifist

“War may sometimes be a necessary evil. But no matter how necessary, it is always an evil, never a good. We will not learn how to live together in peace by killing each other’s children. This famous quote is from James Earl “Jimmy” Carter, Jr., who served as the 39th President of the United States. It implies that war can be justified under strict circumstances where it can be necessary, but it is still abhorrent. War is defined as a state of armed conflict between different countries or different groups within a country. Justification refers to the action of showing something to be right or reasonable. War brings many negative and catastrophic impacts not just to the country, but to the people living in the country as well, which this paper

To begin with, there have been numerous wars throughout the history which has led to the loss of millions of lives. Even in today's world, we have people constantly fighting over which often include children and ultimately sacrificing their lives to defend an ideology. Every time a war is waged, its the people fighting the war and their families who have to make the most

During the 20th century America has been involved in many conflicts that have led to war or the taking up of arms against other humans and nations. Although the vast majority of Americans have blindly accepted these actions throughout the century, more and more people are seeing war as morally wrong. Reasons for this epiphany are based off of a variety of things and encompass many other aspects related to war and killing examples include: due to moral and ethical principles, objection to war due to strong religious beliefs, the objection to violence due to the same ideals above, objection to the government's use of force, and the objection to the use of weapons of mass destruction. Being a conscientious objector is fairly uncommon in the United States military but there are those who have served have identified as one.

When discussing whether or not a nation-state should enter a war and when to do so, three beliefs on foreign policy and war exist. The three different diplomatic stances are that of pacifism, just war theory, and political realism. Political realism, or realpolitik as it is often referred to, is the belief war should only occur when it is in the national interest of the particular nation-state. Henry Kissinger, a political realist, in his book Diplomacy argues that realism is the only logical answer. Just war theorists, along with pacifists, on the other hand oppose these arguments and therefore critique of this form of diplomatic action. To construct a valid understanding of the realist perspective the arguments Kissinger puts forth in

This essay intends to define and give an overview of the ‘Principles of War', the philosophers that coined these principles and with examples from the various countries that used and have their own perspectives on the ‘Principles of War'.