4 ms·
An aside about "Just War Theory" (JWT). I took a semester course in philosophy with Jeff McMahan (who has been working in this area for a long time). Having a t
by yboris 5y ago
An aside about "Just War Theory" (JWT). I took a semester course in philosophy with Jeff McMahan (who has been working in this area for a long time). Having a theory (and a thus set of rules most countries try to follow) is better than nothing, but the current theory seems absurd. It exculpates soldiers from participating in war - it claims they are not doing anything wrong when they follow orders to kill other combatants.
The simplest example of a justified war is one of defense (like what Ukraine is engaging in). But under JWT, even though Russia is not justified in its actions, the individual soldiers are morally permitted to follow orders to kill combatants. Thankfully, at least, under JWT soldiers are not justified in following orders to kill noncombatants.
- no-dr-onboard 5y agoAnother popular individual who speaks at length about JWT is Greg Bahnsen. I recently listened to a podcast[1] that contained an excerpt of a radio program he did in discussing the topic around 2001. Even if you disagree with Bahnsen, the audio is astounding as it shows an era where informed listeners actually call in to have legitimate discussion with the radio guest. It truly is a blast from the past and worth listening to if only for the brief solace that comes from realizing that true academic conversation existed just 20 years ago. 1. https://all-of-christ-for-all-of-life.castos.com/episodes/just-war-theory-greg-bahnsen https://all-of-christ-for-all-of-life.castos.com/episodes/ju...
- yks 5y agoBut then individual soldiers from the attacking side are granted "protection" against mistreatment as prisoners of war, even when that war itself is a crime (against peace) and even when those soldiers themselves commit all war crimes under the sun. Obviously vendetta culture does not bring humanity to the bright place but this protection line, drawn at the possession of the regular army soldier ID, is a rather absurd one.
- watwut 5y agoImo, that is orthogonal. Soldiers being protected from random mistreatment as prisoners of war is ok no matter whether they committed crime or not.
- yks 5y agoWell, essentially they are given carte blanche for war crimes, because if they become prisoners of war, they won't be tried as a regular criminal anyway so it does not matter how many civilians they torture beforehand
- watwut 5y agoNo, that is not actually how it works. You can legally try prisoners of war for torture of civilians.
- watwut 5y agoAlso, lets say, hypothetically when Russia attacks Ukraine and engages in genocide. When someone joins army specifically to defend, somehow it is ok to kill him. But this person, most of them men, have lives as valuable as if they did not joined the defense.