Just war for one state to defend another state?

  • Thread starter Thread starter fakename
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
F

fakename

Guest
I think so because assuming not, then a just war would not include wars with the defense of allies.This means we can fight wars that are for humanitarian reasons (since technically a tyranny isn’t a state and the rebels are the legitimate authorities). But I don’t think that this is true. Am I right or are just wars limited to self-defense?

Also, it occurs to me that criminals still have the ability to defend themselves so the question then becomes, how should police policy respond to this? I mean, how does one distinguish between the need to capture and execute criminals for the common good and aggression against the criminal?
 
So basically, can a state defend an ally state and if so, doesn’t this mean that it is not true that unjust wars are wars to defend other nations? If that is true then it could be just to defend another country through war?
 
Just wars are not limited only to those fought in self defense; they may also be fought in defense of other nations just as the right to self defense doesn’t preclude you from going to the aid of your neighbor.

Among the items Aquinas listed for a war to be just was this:

Secondly, a just cause is required, namely that those who are attacked, should be attacked because they deserve it on account of some fault. Wherefore Augustine says (QQ. in Hept., qu. x, super Jos.): “A just war is wont to be described as one that avenges wrongs, when a nation or state has to be punished, for refusing to make amends for the wrongs inflicted by its subjects, or to restore what it has seized unjustly.”

The Church has never restricted just wars only to cases of self defense.

Ender
 
I believe the best defense is a good offense. That opens up a lot of lee way for conducting a “just” war.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top