Abstract
This paper looks at St. Thomas Aquinas and St. Augustine views on the justification in war under certain circumstances. They argued this on the grounds that, in certain circumstances, the needs of the common good could temporarily override the presumption against violence.

Abstract
In this paper, the premise of war as depicted by Rousseau's commentary on the nature of conflict after man's earlier and more primitive innocence is greatly differing than those proposed by Hobbes and Locke. Hobbes proposes that humans are naturally selfish and prone to war, which presupposes an innate inclination to violate and abuse social contracts. Locke also does not agree with Rousseau, as he believes that man has in an innate ability to liberty that reveals a more positive and hopeful understanding of the 'innocence' that Rousseau imparts in this quote on war.

From the Paper
Thank you for purchasing a customized research paper from The Paper Experts Inc. rive to deliver to our customers the most accurate and up-to-date research each and every time we prepare a custom work. Your Writer ID: #255 Order ID: 20783 Topic: Philosophy Disclaimer: This document should be used in precisely the same way you would use any article you might find in your local research library. Remember, you must cite it properly just like you would any other source listed in your bibliography. If you have any questions regarding citing

Tags:war, philosophy, hobbes

Abstract
This paper examines the ideals of the philosopher Thomas Hobbes from his "Leviathan" written in 1651 in and how his philosophy compares to today's political system. It discusses how Hobbes was a moral pragmatist or utilitarian and how an absolutist government, with executive, legislative and judicial powers in the scepter of one sovereign is Hobbes' idea of keeping the peace. This paper looks at what his reaction may have been today of America's society and political system with increasing crime rate statistics and how he would have viewed America's foreign policy and the Cold War in light of his beliefs. Hobbes would likely have seen today's America as a failed experiment, falling into the spiral of anarchy and mob rule.

From the Paper
"Thomas Hobbes' Leviathan was written in 1651, at a time of civil war in England. The whole of Europe had been ravaged by the Thirty Years' War not long before. When a philosopher flees his homeland seeking the peace of a foreign country because he cannot stay safely, surely his thoughts turn to the barbarous tendencies of man. Hobbes originally planned on a career focused in three different areas of philosophy: the physical body, human nature and society. He tutored across the continent, met and shared ideas with the likes of Descartes and Galileo, Mersenne and Gassendi. But when war broke out, publishing his views on society and utopia became more urgent, and his career plan got out of order. We can understand his philosophy by his writing, but that can only represent his reaction to his world."

Tags:moral, pragmatist, utilitarian, policy, cold, war

Abstract
This paper examines how conflicts and wars have been part of the human civilization since time immemorial and how, throughout the different eons of history, we have accounts of the destructive effects of wars, irrespective of the cause for which they were fought. It discusses how wars are very much a part of the political system of the world and how every religion in the world has had its own maxims and directives used as the standard for either supporting or disapproving of a war. It looks at how, from the Christian perspective, St. Augustine?s ?Just cause theory? is the principle doctrine used for justifying a war. It discusses the philosophy of the ?just war? and ascertains whether or not it was followed in the U.S. war with Iraq.

Outline
Introduction
War and Humanity
Just War Doctrine
War and Ethical Reasoning
Terrorism and Just War
War with Iraq (Preemptive Strike)
Preemptive Attack and Consequences
Conclusion

From the Paper
"Given that wars imply destruction on a large scale and the loss of divinely ordained human life we are faced with the dilemma as to weather or not it is ethical to support it under any circumstances. Certainly we must strive towards peaceful means of settling issues and must avoid war at any cost. Wars that have the motive of national fame, territorial gains and purposes of a non-defensive nature are clearly a breach of ethical and moral code of conduct and should be properly regarded as unjustifiable. But under certain conditions when war is forced upon a nation it stands ethically and morally responsible to defend its people from the onslaught of the attackers."

Tags:augustine, religion, terrorism, saddam, hussein

Abstract
This paper relates that Thomas Hobbes viewed (1) man as being egoistic, self-interested and always aiming towards self-preservation; (2) yet, man can act in ways that are not selfish to preform civic duties and help society and (3) man is in a state of constant war with one another due to the fact that immediate authority is unattainable. The author stresses that Hobbes says that self-preservation is pre-eminent in the nature of man and anything done to keep that motive is humanistic and should be done without recourse. The paper explains that, to Aristotle, (1) mankind is climbing a ladder to reach an end goal of happiness; (2) climbing the steps of the ladder is done in a way that is good for the rest of the community; however, (3) self-sufficiency is the highest virtue of all.

From the Paper
"Aristotle wrote comparatively little on tyranny and its affects on society. According to Aristotle, either the one, the few, or the many rule. Human beings are by nature political and will suffer greatly under despotism or a tyrannical monarchy. A polis that would concern itself only with the negative functions of protecting persons or property is not truly a polis in Aristotle's eyes. Nature's role in the polis was to positively develop human potential and create habits. Despite his conservatism and defending monarchy, Aristotle often displayed genuine fait in the political participation and intelligence of ordinary citizens."

Tags:self-sufficiency, self-preservation, war, property, society

Abstract
The paper looks at how Hobbes and Rousseau offer polar views on humanity in the state of nature. The paper explains that Hobbes describes humanity in nature as engaging in what he calls a war "of every man against every man" (Hobbes, 86) while Rousseau describes humans "emerged from the hands of nature (Rousseau, 26) as being strong, healthy, and free of vice: in short, an "ingenious machine" (ibid., 32) at once moral and free.

From the Paper
"Hobbes and Rousseau offer polar views on humanity in the state of nature. Hobbes describes humanity in nature as engaging in what he calls a war "of every man against every man" (Hobbes, 86) while Rousseau describes humans "emerged from the hands of nature (Rousseau, 26) as being strong, healthy, and free of vice: in short, an "ingenious machine" (ibid., 32) at once moral and free. Rousseau's view has come under intensifying critique. Anthropology has disclosed the conditions of so-called natural humans, finding what Rousseau might have considered civilized vices as murder (Knauft, 154)."

Tags:rousseau, hobbes, nature

Abstract
In this article, the writer examines the condition of women during the Civil War in Southern Appalachia. The writer discusses the social effects of the geography of the region. The writer also looks at its isolation from the rest of the Deep South. The subject of slavery is also discussed in this paper. In addition the writer looks at the role of women in this period.

From the Paper
"The purpose of this research is to examine the status of women who lived in the mountains of western North Carolina and eastern Tennessee during the Civil War. The plan of the research will be to set forth the context in which the experience of women of that region was shaped by events in the U.S. in the mid-nineteenth century and then to discuss with reference to documents generated from the period, ways in which women were obliged to adapt to a situation in which men in their ... "

Tags:North Carolina

Tennessee, Women, Appalachia, Civil War

Appalachia

Civil War

Abstract
Humankind conditions its response by creating rules by which it must play the game. It does not matter what the game is. In the case of "just war" doctrine, the game is war. The primary concern of this thesis is to determine the applicability of these "rules" to the types of warfare that may be conducted in the 21st century. To achieve this goal, one must first understand the war convention, so referred to by Walzer in his book, entitled "Just and Unjust Wars, a Moral Argument with Historical Illustrations" (3rd edition). The paper then explores the possible nature of war in the 21st century, with emphasis on applying, where possible, the "just war" doctrine. Finally, it touches briefly upon the problems involved in the revision of war doctrine as discovered at the 1992 Peace Symposium.

From the Paper
"Is there just cause to start a war? This question is larger than it appears. From a pacifist point of view, there are no justifiable reasons to start a war. However, there are those who point to a perceived threat as a viable basis for war. This point of view dictates a pre-emptive strike even if there is no immediate action taken by the group making the threats. The rules of the game become clouded in this instance. "The line between legitimate and illegitimate first strikes is not going to be drawn at the point of imminent attack but at the point of sufficient threat (Walzer 76-78)." The time span between the perception of harm and the harm itself is subject to scrutiny. Saddam Hussein may call for a jihad against the United States, but when does that threat constitute a reasonable cause for war? What are the consequences of ignoring the threat? How much time should pass before we take action? Is it possible to wait too long?"

Tags:fanaticism, Saddam, Hussein, bio-war

Abstract
This paper discusses how almost two centuries before the First World War, the major powers of the world were engaged in a war that spanned the globe. It looks at how from 1756 to 1763, the major European powers of France and Great Britain were pitted in a war that stretched from Europe to North America to the Far East. The series of hostilities eventually became known as the Seven Years' War and laid the foundation for the British Empire and helped fan the flames of the American Revolution. This paper examines the North American segment of the conflict, known as the French and Indian War which pitted Great Britain and its American colonies against the French and their Algonquian allies. It details the events and conditions that served as the precursors of the French and Indian War looks at the battles themselves, beginning with the 1753 mission to open talks with the French to the decisive British victory in Louisbourg and Quebec in 1759. It also examines the consequences of the Seven Years' War in general and in particular on the American colonies.

From the Paper
"The explorations and trading centers paved the way for French control over Louisiana, Acadia (Nova Scotia) and Northeast Canada. Although the French claimed more territory than the English did, their land was sparsely populated. Oftentimes, the territories were not even marked by the existence of outposts or towns but were simple forts maintained by only a few people (Minks 19). In contrast, the English territories were rapidly being populated. The English areas were settled along the eastern seaboard, from Georgia, the Carolinas, and along what is now the Northeastern United States. By the 18th century, the British population was growing exponentially (Black 36). The British settlers were also becoming aware of the profitable fur trade along the Great Lakes region. These factors served as the main motives behind the British desire to move westward."

Tags:colonies, french, indian, war, louisbourg, quebec

Abstract
This paper questions whether the anti-war sentiment in the US shortened the Vietnam War. The author contends that protesters succeeded in creating a certain consciousness of war activities within the American public. It is argued that the public had only begun to question the war once it was apparent that it had continued for many years, and that there was some feeling that once committed, America could not withdraw without achieving victory. By analyzing the government's reaction to several anti-war incidences in US, the paper argues the government did not have a deep understanding of the anti-war sentiment. Therefore, the anti-war movement could not have impacted the war to such an extent as to shorten it.

From the Paper
"Vietnam was a situation that seemed to develop slowly in the consciousness of the American public so that much of the country seemed to discover rather suddenly that the nation was enmeshed in a growing war to which there seemed no end. In truth, America had been involved in Vietnam for many years before the issue became the catalyst for social protest and political reprisals in the U.S., and for much of that time the public ignored what was taking place. American involvement actually started in 1954, and at that time it was the French who had been caught in the Vietnamese quagmire (Chafe 259). Full American involvement was contemplated prior to 1954 and rejected, in part because Eisenhower did not believe that a military victory was possible because of the political situation in the region, since the people supported the Viet Minh and identified Ho Chi Minh as the leader of their independence movement (Scheer 274-275)."

Tags:media, foreign, policy, war, military