Christian Just War V. Islamic Jihad By Col. Tom Snodgrass (Ret.) ****
Christian Just War V. Islamic Jihad By Col. Tom Snodgrass (Ret.), Right Side News
In the World War II Pacific Theater, our Japanese enemy’s disregard for any human or Judeo-Christian standard of morality made the application of normally acceptable jus in bello criteria absolutely impossible and therefore inapplicable. Are we in a similar situation fighting against Islamic jihad?
Opposing morality codes
The jus ad bellum [Latin for “right to wage war”] criteria are (1) ‘just cause’ in terms of self-defense and protection of innocents; (2) ‘right intention’ to bring justice and peace; (3) ‘proper authority’ and ‘public declaration’ meaning that the declaration of war is executed only by heads of state within a legal framework; (4) ‘last resort’ after other options have been seriously considered, although not necessarily tried; (5) ‘probability of success’ to block violence which is going to be futile; and (6) ‘macro proportionality’ which weighs expected universal good to accrue from its prosecuting the war against the expected universal evils that will result. The jus in bello [acceptable justifications to use various methods of warfare] criteria are (1) ‘micro proportionality’ that weighs the use of a particular weapon or tactic to determine that it is proportional to the threat; and (2) ‘discrimination between combatants and non-combatants.’ – Christian Just War: jus ad bellum and jus in bello criteria
“The way of the warrior is resolute acceptance of death.” – Bushido: Japanese (Tokugawa) Way of the Warriors
“Do not live in shame as a prisoner. Die, and leave no ignominious crime behind you.” – The Japanese Military Field Service Code issued by General Tojo in 1941
Comments are closed.
