Year:

  1.  6
    David M. Barnes (2016). Case Study Commentary and Analysis: The Moral Sword of Damocles. Journal of Military Ethics 15 (1):58-64.
    ABSTRACTCase summary, by James Cook :In the final issue of the 2015 volume of the Journal of Military Ethics, we published a case study entitled “Coining an Ethical Dilemma: The Impunity of Afghanistan’s Indigenous Security Forces”, written by Paul Lushenko. The study detailed two extra-judicial killings by Afghan National Police personnel in an area stabilized and overseen by a US-led Combined Task Force. To deter further EJKs following the first incident, the CTF’s commander reported the incidents up his chain of (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  2.  2
    John Choo & George R. Wilkes (2016). Chinese Just War Ethics: Origin, Development, and Dissent, Edited by Ping-Cheung Lo and Sumner B. Twiss. Journal of Military Ethics 15 (1):65-68.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  3.  2
    August R. Immel (2016). The Need for an Ethical Fitness Assessment in the US Armed Forces. Journal of Military Ethics 15 (1):3-17.
    ABSTRACTWhile many attempts have been made to institutionalize ethical training in the United States Armed Forces, the intended aim of each undertaking – changing the overall perception, understanding, and appreciation of ethics – is not fully achieved. Additionally – and conspicuously absent from each of the ethical initiatives of the warfighting institution – no method to evaluate and assess the ethical behavior of its members exists in the Armed Forces. Because Service members do not have a standard from which to (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  4.  28
    Greg Janzen (2016). A Critique of the Right Intention Condition as an Element of Jus Ad Bellum. Journal of Military Ethics 15 (1):36-57.
    According to just war theory, a resort to war is justified only if it satisfies the right intention condition. This article offers a critical examination of this condition, defending the thesis that, despite its venerable history as part of the just war tradition, it ought to be jettisoned. When properly understood, it turns out to be an unnecessary element of jus ad bellum, adding nothing essential to our assessments of the justice of armed conflict.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  5.  2
    Paul Lushenko (2016). Binary Bullets: The Ethics of Cyberwarfare, Edited by Fitz Allhoff, Adam Henschke and Bradley Jay Strawser. Journal of Military Ethics 15 (1):69-73.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  6.  1
    Duncan Purves & Ryan Jenkins (2016). Right Intention and the Ends of War. Journal of Military Ethics 15 (1):18-35.
    ABSTRACTThe jus ad bellum criterion of right intention is a central guiding principle of just war theory. It asserts that a country’s resort to war is just only if that country resorts to war for the right reasons. However, there is significant confusion, and little consensus, about how to specify the CRI. We seek to clear up this confusion by evaluating several distinct ways of understanding the criterion. On one understanding, a state’s resort to war is just only if it (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  7.  2
    Jeremy S. Stirm (2016). Military Chaplains in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Beyond: Advisement and Leader Engagement in Highly Religious Environments, Edited by Eric Patterson. Journal of Military Ethics 15 (1):74-76.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  8.  1
    Henrik Syse & Martin L. Cook (2016). Intentions and Mindsets. Journal of Military Ethics 15 (1):1-2.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
 Previous issues
  
Next issues