Can someone explain how a just war would be waged? What would be acceptable targets? Would government buildings be acceptable targets? What about bridges? What would make acceptable targets? (of course things like hospitals, residental areas and places of Worship would be off-limits.) If places of Worship are off-limits, what if they use it to store supplies or plan operations such as what insurgents in the middle east sometimes do? What about insurgents, terrorists or guerillas? Should they be treated the same as Prisoners of War? Even though legally, as they do not wear uniforms, are not protected under the Geneva conventions and legally we could execute them? What if you were the Guerilla fighting to defend your country, or liberties from an invading army? (Like in Red Dawn, for example.) Would this be morally acceptable, or are people supposed to obey their new rulers? And finally, what about people rising up against tyranny like the Kurds against Saddam Hussein or the Jews and others in World War II as a last stand against being destroyed by an opressive and tyrannical government?
For starters, see the Catechism para 2302-2330.
After reading and reflecting on those teachings, what questions do you have?
Here is a link to the just war doctrine.
I would think as long as the cause is just. Tactical actions aimed at winning would be just as well. we all know that children are the one who suffer the most during war. But, sometimes warfare is called for.:shrug:
Just a possible counter argument:
Most people would agree that the US entry into WWII was just. The US was attacked w/o warning by Japan and Germany Declared war on the US immidiately after the US declaration on Japan.
I can argue (not neccisarily prove) that the US fire bombing of Japan and some of the carpet bombing of Germany were a violation of Just War Doctrine and I can also dio a good job on the A-bombing of Japan.
Understand please, I am not arguing the strtegic decisions from a military point of view, just from the POV of Just War.
Now Just War is very hard to prove for or against as to do so requires all the information and only God has that. There is still information coming out about both world wars that could conceivably effect that type decision.
My point is that just becauser the original decision to go to war is IAW Just War doctrine, does not mean all following decisions will be Just.
I’m not sure I agree with that. The just war principles are clear. It’s not a lack of information that results in differing opinions on whether a war is within just war criteria, it’s different opinions of how to interpret or apply the criteria. For example, people can easily differ on whether or not the point of “last resort” has been reached while they have the same amount of information.
As always. We look to intent.
What about Guerillas?
Intent is considered as part of the just war criteria. My point was that the criteria can be applied without having to know as much as God does (at least that’s what I read the post I responded to as saying).
Yes sir. I was agreeing with you. I’ll try to communicate better next time.