Ben+C.+-+Just+War

Home Small Wars Project Just Wars Essays

Comparison Essay: How Just Were the U.S.’s Small Wars?

The Just War Theory has two parts. Study the Just War handout and select the two most significant criteria for **//jus ad bellum//** and two most significant criteria for **//jus in bello//**. With these criteria in mind, select one war from each of your three tables that best meets these criteria. In the essay, you will analyze, compare and rank these three wars.

Write an essay that compares the three small wars and analyzes how well all three meet the four criteria that you believe are most important. Based on this comparison, select the __"most just"__ of the three wars and explain the reasons for the choice. Also, explain why your __second choice__ fell short and were not as just as your __first choice__ but is more just than your __third choice__.

RUBRIC: A quality essay will Explain why you selected **jus ad bellum** and **jus in bello** the criteria, Use the __four__ criteria to analyze why the three small wars are "just wars", Support your analysis of each war with evidence from the Small Wars Wiki, Rank the three small wars and explain why one war is more just than the other two, Explain why the __second__ choice fell short compared to the __first__ choice but is more just than the __third__ choice, Organize you writing in extended power paragraphs, Identify the source and establish its credibility with an appositive phrase, Cite evidence __internally__ and in a Works Cited.

POST JUST WAR ESSAY HERE

Ben Clark

Buchholtz Sidor

American studies

12-7-11

Small Wars

In a conflict, you need a just reason to go to war and the two most important reasons to me are that you need the right intention, and you need to be sure that you need to go to war. If you go to war without exercising the other options such as trying to make a treaty, or an alliance you may start something that can be blown way out of proportion. And while you’re in war you need to make sure your doing the right thing, if your there just for your own profit, you aren’t doing anything just. You need to have the right distinction, if your not aiming your mission towards the enemy threat, your doing it wrong. The other one is military necessity. If your attack is not going to help you defeat your enemy then it is not worth it. In this piece I will be talking about the Vietnam War in 1995, the Boxer Rebellion in 1900, and the war in Haiti in 1994. In the Vietnam War, “Was fought between the Vietnamese and the Americans because the United States was assisting France in trying to contain the spread of communism.” We were there for the right cause, to protect the citizens in Vietnam. The reason for going to war was because of the domino affect, we were scared that after Vietnam more places would fall under the powers of Communism. “Fear that the withdrawal of colonial powers from Southeast Asia would lead to the fall of Vietnam…and perhaps India, Japan, the Philippines, and Indonesia." We were also there for a distinct reason, our acts of war were just for stopping the enemy, the U.S. wasn’t there to do anything else. We were there to contain communism. Also our military action was loud and clear. We weren’t there to hurt the civilians; we were there to stop the enemy. In the Boxer Rebellion the 'Boxers' had a mission of destroying all western ideas in China. They were attacking foreigners, missionaries, priests, and Chinese that wanted to convert to Christianity. The U.S. was there for the right intentions, to save our people and to help the people in China that were being singled out and attacked. It was also our last resort because the Boxers were not up to negotiate, they wanted the western ideas out no matter what. "They had already killed many foreigners and even the German ambassador, so the western powers made sure to keep a close eye on their citizens and especially the embassies there (Bryant, Mark)." The Boxers were "executing any Chinese citizen who converted to Christianity, priests and missionaries." The distinction of this conflict was very easy, we need to stop these 'Boxers' and help the people in need. The war in Haiti started in 1994 as a result of the 1991 military ousting of Haitian president. We were being protective to not only Haiti, but also ourselves too. We needed to get the Haitian "immigrants" out and back to their home. "Bill Clinton allowed the Haitian people to asylum to our country, while we tried to restore diplomacy in Haiti." But that was the problem, trying to restore diplomacy did not work. So as a result of this we moved in militarily. As for distinction, it was mixed. We tried to use military to get order back in Haiti, but it was for the citizens, not just to stop the enemy. " The bulk of US citizens wanted us to invade Haiti, No one wanted the US to become overcrowded with Haitian Immigrants and we also wanted our neighbor Haiti to continue having a Democracy." This is why we invaded Haiti. As for Military Necessity, it was needed, but not to destroy the enemy. Our action was to monitor Haiti and help it restore itself to a democracy. As for a war being more just than the others, I think that the Boxer Rebellion was the most just. It was most just because we went in with no intention to gain anything, we went to help our people, and the people of China. As for the guidelines of a just war, it met the criteria for each subject, Right Intention, Last Resort, Distinction, and Military Necessity. The Vietnam War is a close second, but reading the book //The Things They Carried// by Tim O'Brien some of the things they did there were not just, even if the book was fictional, it gave you a concept of what the war was like. Also the uprising which said that we were killing kids in Vietnam, even if they had bombs attached to them. In Haiti, we were there for a just reason, but it was a reoccurring conflict, we had to go back twice. So out of these three wars the one that was most just would have to be the Boxer rebellion.

RUBRIC: A quality essay will

Explain why you selected the two jus ad bellum and the two jus in bello the criteria, reasons are clearly explained

Use the __four__ criteria to analyze why the three small wars are "just wars", criteria are analyzed

Support your analysis of each war with evidence from the Small Wars Wiki, evidence not always used or sources are not credited

Rank the three small wars and explain why one war is more just than the other two, supporting evidence not always offered

Explain why the __second__ choice fell short compared to the __first__ choice but is more just than the __third__ choice,

Organize you writing in extended power paragraphs, not all paragraphs are organized this way

Identify the source and establish its credibility with an appositive phrase, not done; sources not credited

Cite evidence __internally__ and in a Works Cited. many factual statements not credited; no works cited