Just War Theory, Part III

This is the third in a series of posts attempting to apply the concept of Just War Theory to the war in Iraq. Earlier posts include an Introduction, a discussion of proper authority (Part I), and a discussion of war as a last resort (Part II).

According to Just War Theory, any war must be undertaken with "all possible moderation." The failure of the Bush Adminstration to abide by this principle is most obvious of all the violations of Just War Theory, in fact, it is the most disturbing and flagrant violation of religious principles.

In a just war, all international conventions are obeyed, excessive destruction should be avoided, and particular care must be undertaken to avoid the death and injury of non-combatants.

First, this war was begun with a campaign of Shock and Awe in the city of Baghdad. Such a campaign is hardly targeted. Americans are (mis)led to believe that our 'precision weapons' are able to seek out individuals, check addresses, and do no harm except to a purported high value target. While US weapons are indeed more accurate and do less 'collateral damage' that WWII vintage weapons, when our military bombs a major city like Baghdad, with 'Shock and Awe' as an objective, that violates the principle of limitation necessary to avoid civilian deaths. A limited attack, targeting only military installations, for example, may be appropriate. 'Shock and Awe' is not.

The video clip below demonstrates the size and scale of the 'Shock and Awe' campaign, and demonstrates its violation of principle of limited action to avoid civilian casualties.







Additionally, the US has failed to meet its Just War obligations by failing to provide adequate protection for Iraqi civilians in the post-war environment. Untold thousands of Iraqis have died. Thousands more have become refugees from their homes, living with the suffering the results. This failure compounds the consequences of the US invasion which cause death and injury to non combatants. I will deal more with this issue as it relates to another aspect of Just War Theory in a subsequent post.


The Bush Adminstration has made a conscious decision not to abide by international conventions regarding the treatment of detainees. This is an issue about which I have posted on numerous occassions, so I will no revisit all of the issues here. Suffice it to say that our President has seized authority for himself to be the 'decider' as to what constitutes torture, and that practices that clearly are torture under international understandings- such as waterboarding- have been 'redefined' as merely 'aggressive interrogation techniques.' See previous posts such as "World Leader in Torture", "Wisked Away", "Torture Law is Signed", "This Isn't Torture?" (w/ video of waterboarding), "We don't torture...", and "Read my Lips" for some of the details on the US torture policy.

And then, of course, there is Abu Ghraib.

We have failed to conduct a war consistent with the protection of Iraqi civilians (those who we went to Iraq to liberate), and failed to conduct a war consistent with internation conventions.

Again, the US has demonstrably failed to meet the moral obligations of Just War Theory.


GP