Obama wants to start taking troop out of Afghanistan and move his focus to other nuclear powered countries such as Pakistan. My question is would U.S. intervening in Pakistan be considered just? Here is a article to help you answer my probing question; http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/25/world/asia/pakistan-says-us-drone-strike-kills-suspected-militants.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/20/us/obamas-journey-to-reshape-afghanistan-war.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all
U.S. intervention is just with Pakistan. We do not need to start a war but we could send troops to observe the country to make peace in Pakistan. So I advise the U.S. intervention to establish security of nuclear power.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Steve because if we were to intervene in Pakistan it may cause war with us and we dont want that...but if we just go and try to see the problem then we could help them and maybe have alliance with Pakistan. Also we could solve there problems in a peaceful way and not have war and maybe other countries will see the safe and we will all be peaceful.
ReplyDeleteI think that United States intervention in Pakistan would be just. if the u.s. sent military troops into Pakistan I think that they wouldnt be very happy with that and would fight back and start a war. But i see that we could help them with there counrties problems and try and establish peace.
ReplyDeletei think the united states moving its focus to Pakistan would be just if Pakistan's nuclear weapons were a threat to us or if we were getting any sort of profit out of this. otherwise the united states wasting time in a country that might not have nuclear weapons would be useless when we could do something more meaningful with our time and money.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Steve and Melanie about how we could send some troops into Pakistan just to keep the whole nuclear weapon situation under control, but i do not agree with all the other students on the subject of this war being just. According to the Just War Theory U.S. military intervention in Pakistan would not be considered just because it disagrees with more than half of the qualifications. it disagrees with qualifiactions such as a war being fought to redress a wrong being suffered, at this point in time Pakistan has yet to fire any means of attack on America and since we havent suffered any wrongs YET this is disagreeable. This war would not be waged as a last resort because they havent threatened us or anything so we still have the choice to wait it out. We also have not suffered any injuries so the violence used in war would definately not be proportional and last, but not least, using past wars in that area (such as Afganhistan) many innocent civilians were killed which disagrees with the last qualification of the Theory. Four out of seven qualifactions were unfufilled therefore making this an unjust war.
ReplyDelete