Why think that certain kinds of behaviour can make us liable to harm?

Is war always worse than the alternatives?

Jus in Bello:
1. Proportionality: the expected bad effects of an act of war must not be excessive in relation to the good effects that the act is intended to achieve.
2. Necessity: An attack may be carried out only when necessary for the achievement of a military goal.
3. Discrimination: Combatants must discriminate, or distinguish, between legitimate and illegitimate targets, directing military force only at the former.

The Principle of non-combatant immunity

The Doctrine of Double Effect

“The only place where you and I disagree … is with regard to the bombing….
You’re so goddamned concerned about the civilians and I don’t give a damn.
I don’t care” Richard Nixon.

The Atomic Bombing of Hiroshima:
§Approximately 70,000 people were killed immediately,
§An additional 30,000 died over the next few months,
§The death total after five years was 200,000 approx.
“This single act …had as an immediate physical effect the killing of more people, the vast majority of whom were civilians, than any other single act ever done…
[This] act is therefore the most egregious war crime, and the most destructive single terrorist act, ever committed, even though it was committed in the course of a just war” McMahan.

Traditional Just War Theory: The term ‘war’ “is ambiguous in a way that it is important to be clear about.
Most commonly it refers to the aggregate fighting of a number of belligerent parties.
World War II, for example, was fought by Germany, France, Britain, and a large number of other countries…
Yet we can also say of each belligerent in World War II that it fought a war.
Britain fought a war against Germany and Germany fought a war against Britain .
Each of those wars was a part of World War II” Jeff McMahan, Killing in War

§Jus ad bellum: principles regulating the resort to war
1.Just cause
Necessary but insufficient – “Just cause should … be understood as the foundation of a case for war –
the trigger that begins the debate about whether the war could be morally permissible” Helen Frowe, The Ethics of War and Peace.
2. Proportionality
3. Reasonable chance of success
4. Legitimate authority
5. Right intention
6. Last resort
§
§Jus in bello: principles regulating conduct within war

Criteria: War “necessarily involves killing and maiming, typically on a large scale.
A just cause, then, has to be a goal of a type that can justify killing and maiming” McMahan, “Just Causes for War”.

A goal that can justify killing and maiming is “the prevention or correction of wrongs that are serious enough to make the perpetrators liable to be killed or maimed” McMahan, “Just Causes for War”.

Liability vs Desert
Rights-forfeiture

Why think that certain kinds of behaviour can make us liable to harm?

Just causes involve “the prevention or correction of wrongs that are serious enough to make the perpetrators liable to be killed or maimed” McMahan, “Just Causes for War”.

Last Completed Projects