Just and Unjust wars Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Just and partial wars - Essay ExampleAssassination involves trick, betrayal and infidelity. Gross has argued that character assassination is non allowed in the regulations of armed clashes and that it coffin nail be considered as murder by deceitful means (245). This indicates that if there is no kind of dishonesty involved, there would be nonhing wrong with assassination. The author makes it clear in his argument that assassination is not always a result of betrayal but is also evidence of morality of premeditated cleanup of the individuals. Some researchers use the terms assassination and targeted killing interchangeably in order to avoid linking treachery with assassination. The ethical legitimacy of targeted killing can be described when it is compared to other methods of fighting against terrorism, which can be massive invasion and destroying the complete infrastructure of terrorists. some(prenominal) experts claim that the real war method would be the invasion rather th an targeted killings, because it bears the actual concept of war. Invading a civilian area leads to a much number of deaths and casualties of common inculpable people. With targeted killing the damage is reduced hence, it is the preferable method as it saves innocent lives and keeps the damage low (Gross 115). There have been various arguments to justify tyrannicide. Unless tyrannicide is linked with an effort to change the governing entirely, it is expected to result in repressions of the general public greatly. Assassination is considered to be a careful preference when aiming at preventing and ending the war against terrorism. This might be applicable in some cases, but assassination has not been preferred because there are other less harmful and less objectionable methods the like tyrannicide (Lenin 60-62). Discuss Collateral Damage, Providing a Conceptual Definition First, and Then an Illustration of It, by Using Examples drawn from Different Fields and Different Historic al Periods The term collateral damage was first used by the US army during the Second Gulf War. Collateral damage can be described as civilian casualties due to bombings of allied armed services forces. By describing losses of civilian lives and properties, the officials redirect the criticism against the military for a high death cast of common people (Hashmi 125-127). Though the phrase has its roots in the military background, it has also been interchangeably used in common language. The business world is fond of the exercise of this term for unintentional damage caused by an action. For example, if an organization shifts its offices to a new city, the losses suffered by the topical anesthetic businesses can be termed as collateral damage. The abrupt or unexpected closing of a ingredient or division of a company due to financial crisis can also be termed as collateral damage, as the employees would lose their means of income. This damage will be considered as significant, but the losses will be still acceptable if compared to the advantages and profits of taking action. Many experts believe that focussing moreover on the deaths of common people as a way of accessing a military operation is not a flawless approach. The US militarys protests against body count have its roots in Vietnam, where there were no links of enemy death count to the overall success of a mission. Many researchers and analysts argue that failure of a mission cannot be determined by the total death count of civilians.