Results for 'war'

509 found
Order:
  1.  53
    Civil War and Revolution.Jonathan Parry - 2018 - In Seth Lazar & Helen Frowe (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Ethics of War. Oxford, UK:
    The vast majority of work on the ethics of war focuses on traditional wars between states. In this chapter, I aim to show that this is an (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  2.  71
    Weighing Lives in War- Foreign Vs. Domestic.Saba Bazargan-Forward - 2018 - In Larry May (ed.), Cambridge Handbook on the Just War. pp. 186-198.
    I argue that the lives of domestic and enemy civilians should not receive equal weight in our proportionality calculations. Rather, the lives of enemy civilians ought to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  3. Preventive Wars, Just War Principles, and the United Nations.John W. Lango - 2005 - Journal of Ethics 9 (1-2):247-268.
    This paper explores the question of whether the United Nations should engage in preventive military actions. Correlatively, it asks whether UN preventive military actions could satisfy just (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  4.  17
    Emerging Metropolis: Politics of Planning in Tehran During Cold War.Asma Mehan - 2017 - In COLD WAR AT THE CROSSROADS: 194X-198X. Architecture and planning between politics and ideology. Milan, Metropolitan City of Milan, Italy:
    The Second World War and its associated political events of a national and global scale brought new circumstances, which was considerably influenced the development processes of Tehran. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5. Compensation and Proportionality in War.Saba Bazargan-Forward - 2017 - In Claire Finkelstein, Larry Larry & Jens David Ohlin (eds.), Weighing Lives in War. Oxford University Press).
    Even in just wars we infringe the rights of countless civilians whose ruination enables us to protect our own rights. These civilians are owed compensation, even in (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  6. Non-Combatant Immunity and War-Profiteering.Saba Bazargan - 2017 - In Helen Frowe & Lazar Seth (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Ethics and War. Oxford University Press.
    The principle of noncombatant immunity prohibits warring parties from intentionally targeting noncombatants. I explicate the moral version of this view and its criticisms by reductive individualists; they (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  7. Jus Ad Vim and the Just Use of Lethal Force Short of War.S. Brandt Ford - 2013 - In Fritz Allhoff, Nicholas Evans & Adam Henschke (eds.), Routledge Handbook of Ethics and War: Just War Theory in the 21st Century. Routledge. pp. 63--75.
    In this chapter, I argue that the notion which Michael Walzer calls jus ad vim might improve the moral evaluation for using military lethal force in conflicts (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  8. Is Political Obligation Necessary for Obedience? Hobbes on Hostility, War and Obligation.Thomas M. Hughes - 2012 - Teoria Politica 2:77-99.
    Contemporary debates on obedience and consent, such as those between Thomas Senor and A. John Simmons, suggest that either political obligation must exist as a concept or (...)
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  9. Just War and RobotsKillings.Thomas W. Simpson & Vincent C. Müller - 2016 - Philosophical Quarterly 66 (263):302-22.
    May lethal autonomous weapons systems—‘killer robots ’—be used in war? The majority of writers argue against their use, and those who have argued in favour have (...)done so on a consequentialist basis. We defend the moral permissibility of killer robots, but on the basis of the non-aggregative structure of right assumed by Just War theory. This is necessary because the most important argument against killer robots, the responsibility trilemma proposed by Rob Sparrow, makes the same assumptions. We show that the crucial moral question is not one of responsibility. Rather, it is whether the technology can satisfy the requirements of fairness in the re-distribution of risk. Not only is this possible in principle, but some killer robots will actually satisfy these requirements. An implication of our argument is that there is a public responsibility to regulate killer robotsdesign and manufacture. (shrink)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  10. Associative Duties and the Ethics of Killing in War.Seth Lazar - 2013 - Journal of Practical Ethics 1 (1):3-48.
    this paper advances a novel account of part of what justifies killing in war, grounded in the duties we owe to our loved ones to protect them (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  11. The Future of War: The Ethical Potential of Leaving War to Lethal Autonomous Weapons.Steven Umbrello, Phil Torres & Angelo F. De Bellis - forthcoming - AI and Society.
    Lethal Autonomous Weapons (LAWs) are robotic weapons systems, primarily of value to the military, that could engage in offensive or defensive actions without human intervention. This paper (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  12. Rethinking Realism (or Whatever) and the War on Terrorism in a Place Like the Balkans.Rory Conces - 2009 - Theoria: A Journal of Social and Political Theory 56 (120):81-124.
    Political realism remains a powerful theoretical framework for thinking about international relations, including the war on terrorism. For Morgenthau and other realists, foreign policy is a matter (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  13. Complicitous Liability in War.Saba Bazargan - 2013 - Philosophical Studies 165 (1):177-195.
    Jeff McMahan has argued against the moral equivalence of combatants (MEC) by developing a liability-based account of killing in warfare. On this account, a combatant is (...)morally liable to be killed only if doing so is an effective means of reducing or eliminating an unjust threat to which that combatant is contributing. Since combatants fighting for a just cause generally do not contribute to unjust threats, they are not morally liable to be killed; thus MEC is mistaken. The problem, however, is that many unjust combatants contribute very little to the war in which they participateoften no more than the typical civilian. Thus either the typical civilian is morally liable to be killed, or many unjust combatants are not morally liable to be killed. That is, the liability based account seems to force us to choose between a version of pacifism, and total war. Seth Lazar has called thisThe Responsibility Dilemma”. But I will argue that we can salvage a liability-based account of warone which rejects MECby grounding the moral liability of unjust combatants not only in their individual contributions but also in their complicit participation in that war. On this view, all enlistees, regardless of the degree to which they contribute to an unjust war, are complicitously liable to be killed if it is necessary to avert an unjust threat posed by their side. This collectivized liability based account I develop avoids the Responsibility Dilemma unlike individualized liability-based accounts of the sort developed by McMahan. (shrink)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  14. The Moral Equality of Modern Combatants and the Myth of Justified War.Uwe Steinhoff - 2012 - Theoretical and Applied Ethics 1 (4):35-44.
    In the tradition of just war theory two assumptions have been taken pretty much for granted: first, that there are quite a lot of justified wars, and (...)
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  15. What's A Just War Theorist?Aleksandar Jokic - 2012 - Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Criminology 4 (2):91-114.
    The article provides an account of the unlikely revival of the medieval Just War Theory, due in large part to the efforts of Michael Walzer. Its purpose (...)
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  16. Honor War Theory: Romance or Reality?Daniel Demetriou - 2013 - Philosophical Papers 42 (3):285 - 313.
    Just War Theory (JWT) replaced an older "warrior code," an approach to war that remains poorly understood and dismissively treated in the philosophical literature. This paper (...) builds on recent work on honor to address these deficiencies. By providing a clear, systematic exposition of "Honor War Theory" (HWT), we can make sense of paradigm instances of warrior psychology and behavior, and understand the warrior code as the martial expression of a broader honor-based ethos that conceives of obligation in terms of fair competition for prestige. Far from being a romantic and outmoded approach to war, HWT accounts for current conflicts and predicts moral intuitions that JWT either rejects or cannot comfortably accommodate. So although it is not recommended as a replacement for JWT, there is good reason think that a fully mature, realistic, and yet properly normative theory of war ethics will incorporate a variety of insights from HWT. (shrink)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  17. Unjust War and a Soldier's Moral Dilemma.Jeff Montrose - 2013 - Journal of Military Ethics 12 (4):325-340.
    This paper explores the central question of why soldiers in democratic societies might decide to fight in wars that they may have reason to believe are objectively (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  18. Putting the War Back in Just War Theory: A Critique of Examples.Rigstad Mark - 2017 - Ethical Perspectives 24 (1):123-144.
    Analytic just war theorists often attempt to construct ideal theories of military justice on the basis of intuitions about imaginary and sometimes outlandish examples, often taken from (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  19. The Morality and Law of War.Seth Lazar - 2012 - In Andrei Marmor (ed.), Routledge Companion to the Philosophy of Law. Routledge. pp. 364.
    The revisionist critique of conventional just war theory has undoubtedly scored some important victories. Walzers elegantly unified defense of combatant legal equality and noncombatant immunity has (...)been seriously undermined. This critical success has not, however, been matched by positive arguments, which when applied to the messy reality of war would deprive states and soldiers of the permission to fight wars that are plausibly thought to be justified. The appeal to law that is sought to resolve this objection by casting it as a practical concern, a pragmatic worry about implementation, which while germane to debates over the laws of war, need not undermine our convictions in the fundamental principles the revisionists advocate. This response is inadequate. Revisionists have not shown that soldiers should obey the laws of war, in practice, when they conflict with their other moral reasonsour worries about application remain intact. Moreover, a theory of war that offers only an account of the laws of war, and a set of fundamental principles developed in abstraction from feasibility constraints, is radically incomplete. We need to know how to apply those fundamental principles, and whether, when applied, they lead to defensible conclusions. Only two options seem to remain. Perhaps the revisionistsarguments for their chosen fundamental principles are sufficiently compelling that we should stick with them, and accept their troubling conclusionsin other words, accept pacifism. Alternatively, we need to revise our fundamental principles, so that when applied they yield conclusions that we can more confidently endorse. -/- Though it does not save the revisionist view from the responsibility dilemma and cognate objections, the appeal to law does raise an important, and previously inadequately theorized, questionor, rather, resurrects a neglected topic, discussed in depth by historical just war theorists such as Grotius and Vattel. There are good grounds for distinguishing the laws of war from the morality of war, and for adjusting the former to accommodate predictable noncompliance, that should not impact on our account of the latter. Nonetheless, I have argued that there are some profound moral insights underlying both combatant legal equality and noncombatant immunity: specifically, we cannot infer from a combatants side having not satisfied jus ad bellum that he may not justifiably use lethal force; and other things equal, it is more wrongful to harm a nonliable noncombatant than to harm a nonliable combatant. (shrink)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  20. Just War Theory, Legitimate Authority, and Irregular Belligerency.Jonathan Parry - 2015 - Philosophia 43 (1):175-196.
    Since its earliest incarnations, just war theory has included the requirement that war must be initiated and waged by a legitimate authority. However, while recent years have (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  21. What Is WarAnd Can a Lone Individual Wage One?Uwe Steinhoff - 2009 - International Journal of Applied Philosophy 23 (1):133-150.
    Practically all modern definitions of war rule out that individuals can wage war. They conceive of war as a certain kind of conflict between groups. In fact, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  22.  69
    Taking War Seriously.Charles Blattberg - 2019 - Philosophy 94 (1):139-60.
    Just war theoryas advanced by Michael Walzer, among othersfails to take war seriously enough. This is because it proposes that we regulate war with (...)systematic rules that are comparable to those of a game. Three types of claims are advanced. The first is phenomenological: that the theory's abstract nature interferes with our judgment of what is, and should be, going on. The second is meta-ethical: that the theory's rules are not, in fact, systematic after all, there being inherent contradictions between them. And the third is practical: that by getting people to view war as like a game, the theory promotes itsaestheticization’ (play being a central mode of the aesthetic) such that those who fight are encouraged to act in dangerous ways. And war, it goes without saying, is already dangerous enough. (shrink)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  23.  64
    From Nomos to Hegung: Sovereignty and the Laws of War in Schmitts International Order.Johanna Jacques - 2015 - The Modern Law Review 78 (3):411-430.
    Carl Schmitt's notion of nomos is commonly regarded as the international equivalent to the national sovereign's decision on the exception. But can concrete spatial order alone (...) turn a constellation of forces into an international order? This article looks at Schmitt's work The Nomos of the Earth and proposes that it is the process of bracketing war called Hegung which takes the place of the sovereign in the international order Schmitt describes. Beginning from an analysis of nomos, the ordering function of the presocratic concept moira is explored. It is argued that the process of Hegung, like moira, does not just achieve the containment of war, but constitutes the condition of possibility for plural order. (shrink)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  24.  96
    Mandatory Minimums and the War on Drugs.Daniel Wodak - 2018 - In David Boonin (ed.), Palgrave Handbook of Philosophy and Public Policy. Palgrave.
    Mandatory minimum sentencing provisions have been a feature of the U.S. justice system since 1790. But they have expanded considerably under the war on drugs, and (...)their use has expanded considerably under the Trump Administration; some states are also poised to expand drug-related mandatory minimums further in efforts to fight the current opioid epidemic. In this paper I outline and evaluate three prominent arguments for and against the use of mandatory minimums in the war on drugsthey appeal, respectively, to proportionality, consistency, and efficiency. I ultimately defend the view that the use of mandatory minimums in the war on drugs is unjust. -/- . (shrink)
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  25. The Disastrous War Against Terrorism: Violence Versus Enlightenment.Nicholas Maxwell - 2007 - In Albert W. Merkidze (ed.), Terrorism Issues: Threat Assessment , Consequences and Prevention.
    In combating international terrorism, it is important to observe some basic principles, such as that international law must be complied with, care should be taken that one (...)
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  26. Just War and Non-Combatants in the Private Military Industry.Paul Richard Daniels - 2015 - Journal of Military Ethics 14 (2):146-161.
    I argue that, according to Just War Theory, those who work as administrative personnel in the private military industry can be permissibly harmed while at work by (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  27. The Bureaucratization of War: Moral Challenges Exemplified by the Covert Lethal Drone.Richard Adams & Chris Barrie - 2013 - Ethics and Global Politics 6 (4):245-260.
    This article interrogates the bureaucratization of war, incarnate in the covert lethal drone. Bureaucracies are criticized typically for their complexity, inefficiency, and inflexibility. This article is concerned (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  28. When May Soldiers Participate in War?Uwe Steinhoff - 2016 - International Theory 8 (2):262-296.
    I shall argue that in some wars both sides are (as a collective) justified, that is, they can both satisfy valid jus ad bellum requirements. Moreover, in (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  29.  41
    How Sincere Was Leibnizs Religious Justification for War in the Justa Dissertatio?Lloyd Strickland - 2016 - In Wenchao Li (ed.), Für unser Glück oder das Glück anderer (volume 5). Hildesheim: Georg Olms. pp. 401-412.
    This paper is concerned with Leibnizs Egypt Plan, written in 1671 and 1672, when Leibniz was in the service of the Elector of Mainz. One of (...)the aims of this paper is to offer a more balanced and plausible reading of the religious benefits of war that Leibniz outlines in his Egypt plan. (shrink)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  30.  87
    Varieties of Contingent Pacifism in War.Saba Bazargan-Forward - 2014 - In Helen Frowe & Gerald Lang (eds.), How We Fight. Oxford University Press. pp. 1-17.
    The destruction wrought by even just wars lends undeniable appeal to radical pacifism, according to which all wars are unjust. Yet radical pacifism is fundamentally flawed. In (...)
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  31. A Challenge to the Reigning Theory of the Just War.Christian Barry - 2011 - International Affairs 87 (2):457-466.
    Troubled times often gives rise to great art that reflects those troubles. So too with political theory. The greatest work of twentieth century political theory, John Rawls' (...)s A theory of justice, was inspired in various respects by extreme social and economic inequality, racialized slavery and racial segregation in the United States. Arguably the most influential work of political theory since RawlsMichael Walzer's Just and unjust warsa sustained and historically informed reflection on the morality of interstate armed conflictwas written in the midst of the Vietnam War. It should be no surprise, then, that the bellicose period of the past 20 years should give rise to a robust new literature in political theory on the morality of armed conflict. It has been of uneven quality, and to some extent episodic, responding to particular challengesthe increased prevalence of asymmetric warfare and the permissibility of preventive or preemptive warthat have arisen as a result of specific events. In the past decade, however, a group of philosophers has begun to pose more fundamental questions about the reigning theory of the morality of armed conflict warfarejust war theoryas formulated by Walzer and others. Jeff McMahan's concise, inventive and tightly argued work Killing in war is without doubt the most important of these challenges to the reigning theory of the just war. This review article discusses McMahan's work, some of the critical attention it has received, and its potential implications for practice. (shrink)
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  32.  70
    Where Nothing Happened: The Experience of War Captivity and Levinass Concept of theThere Is’.Johanna Jacques - 2017 - Social and Legal Studies 26 (2):230-248.
    This article takes as its subject matter the juridico-political space of the prisoner of war (POW) camp. It sets out to determine the nature of this (...)space by looking at the experience of war captivity by Jewish members of the Western forces in World War II, focusing on the experience of Emmanuel Levinas, who spent 5 years in German war captivity. On the basis of a historical analysis of the conditions in which Levinas spent his time in captivity, it argues that the POW camp was a space of indifference that was determined by the legal exclusion of prisoners from both war and persecution. Held behind the stage of world events, prisoners were neither able to exercise their legal agency nor released from law into a realm of extra-legal violence. Through a close reading of Levinass early concept of thethere is’ [il y a], the article seeks to establish the impact on prisoners of prolonged confinement in such a space. It sets out how prisonerssubjectivity dissolved in the absence of meaningful relations with others and identifies the POW camp as a space in which existence was reduced to indeterminate, impersonal being. (shrink)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  33. The International Rule of Law and Killing in War.Jovana Davidovic - 2012 - Social Theory and Practice 38 (3):531-553.
    In this paper, I suggest that for some proposed solutions to global justice problems, incompatibility with the necessary features of international law is a reason to reject (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  34. Drones and the Threshold for Waging War.Ezio Di Nucci - forthcoming - Politik.
    I argue that, if drones make waging war easier, the reason why they do so may not be the one commonly assumed within the philosophical debatenamely (...) the promised reduction in casualties on either sidebut a more complicated one which has little to do with concern for ones own soldiers or, for that matter, the enemy; and a lot more to do with the political intricacies of international relations and domestic politics; I use the example of the Obama Administrations drone policies to illustrate this argument. My point is meant to have wider methodological significance: philosophy can make an important contribution to this and related applied debates; but it is not by artificiallyand optimisticallysimplifying realities on the ground that philosophers can be of help. (shrink)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  35. Environmental Security and Just Causes for War.Juha Räikkä & Andrei Rodin - 2015 - Almanac: Discourses of Ethics 10 (1):47-54.
    This article asks whether a country that suffers from serious environmental problems caused by another country could have a just cause for a defensive war? Danish philosopher (...)
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  36. Assembling an Army: Considerations for Just War Theory.Nathan P. Stout - 2016 - Journal of Global Ethics 12 (2):204-221.
    ABSTRACTThe aim of this paper is to draw attention to an issue which has been largely overlooked in contemporary just war theorynamely the impact that the (...) conditions under which an army is assembled are liable to have on the judgments that are made with respect to traditional principles of jus ad bellum and jus in bello. I argue that the way in which an army is assembled can significantly alter judgments regarding the justice of a war. In doing so, I present and defend a principle ofjust assemblyand argue that satisfying this principle is an essential part of any deliberation regarding the justice of a particular conflict. (shrink)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  37. Non-Culpable Ignorance and Just War Theory.Jovan Babic - 2007 - Filozofija I Društvo 18 (3):59-68.
    The so callednon-culpable ignoranceis an instrument to justify participating in a war on a defeated side, on condition that fighters sincerely believe that they (...)are defending a just cause and had some valid reasons to believe in having a chance to win. Within the just war theory this instrument is needed to make both sides prima facie right, otherwise the theory would imply that those who lose are guilty in advance, especially if they are the weaker side. However, in contemporary context of criminalizing war the very concept of war is changing and becoming extremely vague. As wars are more and moreasymmetric′, just war theory might face serious challenges regarding incorporation ofnon-culpable ignorancewithin its scope, as well as difficulties in showing that justice goes with the victory, opening thus the issues of articulation of a just peace. (shrink)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  38. All's Fair in Love and War? Machiavelli and Ang Lee's "Ride With the Devil".James Edwin Mahon - 2013 - In Robert Arp, Adam Barkman & Nancy King (eds.), The Philosophy of Ang Lee. University Press of Kentucky. pp. 265-290.
    In this chapter I argue that Machiavelli does not hold that all deception is permissible in war. While Machiavelli claims that "deceit... in the conduct of (...)war is laudable and honorable," he insists that such deceit, or ruses of war, is not to be confounded with perfidy. Any Lee's U.S. Civil War film, "Ride With the Devil," illustrates this difference. The film also illustrates the difference between lying as part of romance, which is permitted, and lying at the moment of truth in a relationship, when admitting one's feelings, which is not. (shrink)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  39. Book Review: Chris Cuomo. The Philosopher Queen: Feminist Essays on War, Love, and Knowledge. Lanham, Md.: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2003[REVIEW]Alison Bailey - 2005 - Hypatia 20 (3):218-221.
    The Philosopher Queen: Feminist Essays on War, Love, and Knowledge. By Chris Cuomo. Lanham, Md.: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2003. The Philosopher Queen is a powerful (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  40. Liability, Community, and Just Conduct in War.Jonathan Parry - 2015 - Philosophical Studies 172 (12):3313-3333.
    Those of us who are not pacifists face an obvious challenge. Common-sense morality contains a stringent constraint on intentional killing, yet war involves homicide on a (...)grand scale. If wars are to be morally justified, it needs be shown how this conflict can be reconciled. A major fault line running throughout the contemporary just war literature divides two approaches to attempting this reconciliation. On areductivistview, defended most prominently by Jeff McMahan, the conflict is largely illusory, since such killing can be justified by aggregating individualsordinary permissions to use force in self- and other-defence. In opposition, a rivalnonreductivistapproach holds that these considerations are insufficient for the task. One prominent version of non-reductivism grounds the permission to kill in combatantsmembership in certain kinds of group or association. The key claim is that participation in certain morally important relationships can provide an independent source of permission for killing in war. This paper argues that non-reductivism should be rejected. It does so by pushing a dilemma onto non-reductivists: if they are successful in showing that the relevant relationships can generate permissions to kill in war, they must also jettison the most intuitive restrictions on conduct in warthe constraint on intentionally killing morally innocent non-combatants most saliently. Since this conclusion is unacceptable, non-reductivism should be rejected. (shrink)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  41. Montesquieu and Locke on Democratic Power and the Justification of theWar on Terror”.Cory Wimberly - 2008 - International Studies in Philosophy 40 (2):107-120.
    This paper focuses on a comparative analysis of the legitimate exercise of democratic power in the philosophies of Montesquieu and Locke. This analysis not only highlights a (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  42. Review of Schlesinger, War and the American Presidency[REVIEW]H. G. Callaway - 2008 - Reason Papers 2008 (No. 30):121-128.
    This is a expository and critical review of Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. 's last book, War and the American Presidency. The book collects and focuses recent writings of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  43. Review: War and Self-Defense[REVIEW]Christopher Woodard - 2005 - Mind 114 (454):453-457.
    A review of David Rodin's Book, War and Self-Defense.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  44. Alexander James Dallas: An Exposition of the Causes and Character of the War. An Annotated Edition.H. G. Callaway (ed.) - 2011 - Dunedin Academic Press.
    Alexander James Dallas' An Exposition of the Causes and Character of the War was written as part of an effort by the then US government to explain (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  45.  41
    Review of: "L. H. E. Kleinreesink, On Military Memoirs. A Quantitative Comparison of International Afghanistan War Autobiographies, 20012010, Leiden / Boston: Brill (Egodocuments and History Series; Vol. 10).". [REVIEW]Magnus Frisch - 2018 - Res Militares – The Official Newsletter of the Society of Ancient Military Historians 18 (1):4-5.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  46.  54
    The Cognitive Geometry of War.Barry Smith - 1997 - In Peter Koller & Klaus Puhl (eds.), Current Issues in Political Philosophy: Justice in Society and World Order. Vienna: Hölder-Pichler-Tempsky. pp. 394--403.
    When national borders in the modern sense first began to be established in early modern Europe, non-contiguous and perforated nations were a commonplace. According to the (...)conception of the shapes of nations that is currently preferred, however, nations must conform to the topological model of circularity; their borders must guarantee contiguity and simple connectedness, and such borders must as far as possible conform to existing topographical features on the ground. The striving to conform to this model can be seen at work today in Quebec and in Ireland, it underpins much of the rhetoric of the P.L.O., and was certainly to some degree involved as a motivating factor in much of the ethnic cleansing which took place in Bosnia in recent times. The question to be addressed in what follows is: to what extent could inter-group disputes be more peacefully resolved, and ethnic cleansing avoided, if political leaders, diplomats and others involved in the resolution of such disputes could be brought to accept weaker geometrical constraints on the shapes of nations? A number of associated questions then present themselves: What sorts of administrative and logistical problems have been encountered by existing non contiguous nations and by perforated nations, and by other nations deviating in different ways from the received geometrical ideal? To what degree is the desire for continuity and simple connectedness a rational desire, and to what degree does it rest on species of political rhetoric which might be countered by, for example, philosophical argument? These and a series of related questions will form the subject- matter of the present essay. (shrink)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  47.  55
    Book Review: To End a War.Rory J. Conces - 1998/99 - International Third World Studies Journal and Review 10:77-79.
    [1] If asked to name career diplomats who have tackled some very difficult international crises, many foreign policy makers would put Richard Holbrooke near the top of (...)
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  48.  49
    Ukrainian Students in Spain After World War II.Oleksandr Pronkevych & Olga Shestopal - 2018 - Kyiv-Mohyla Humanities Journal 5:117-132.
    The paper analyzes a book written by Volodymyr Yarymovych, Oleksandr Bilyk, and Mykola Volynskyi, entitled Narys istorii ukrainskoi studentskoi hromady ta Ukrainskykh poselen v Espanii 19461996 ( (...)An Overview of the History of the Ukrainian Student Community and Ukrainian Settlements in Spain, 19461996), which tells about the Ukrainian students who arrived in Madrid in 1946 and formed part of the early Ukrainian Diaspora in Spain. The book proves to be an important source of information, previously unknown to scholars, which describes the dramatic and controversial process of constructing Ukrainian identity in the aftermath of World War II. The authors of the study consider the historical and cultural context of the Ukrainian emigration in the second half of the 20th century, its connection with Francoist ideology, and its integral role in the Spanish-Ukrainian cultural dialogue. (shrink)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  49.  28
    How the Seven Sociopaths Who Rule China Are Winning World War Three and Three Ways to Stop Them.Michael Starks - 2019 - In Suicide by Democracy-an Obituary for America and the World . Las Vegas, NV USA: Reality Press. pp. 54-60.
    The first thing we must keep in mind is that when saying that China says this or China does that, we are not speaking of the Chinese (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  50. From Moral Responsibility to Legal Responsibility in the Conduct of War.Lavinia Andreea Bejan - 2015 - Symposion: Theoretical and Applied Inquiries in Philosophy and Social Sciences 2 (3):347–362.
    Different societies came to consider certain behaviors as morally wrong, and, in time, due to a more or less general practice, those behaviors have also become legally (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
1 — 50 / 509