War After September 11Verna V. Gehring What are the limits of justified retaliation against aggression? What actions are morally permissible in preventing future aggression? Against whom may retaliation be aimed? These questions have long been part of the debate over the ethics of warfare. They all took on new meaning after terrorists hijacked four U.S. airliners on September 11, 2001. War after September 11 considers the just aims and legitimate limits of the United States' response to the terrorist attacks. Six essayists from the Institute for Philosophy and Public Policy at the University of Maryland pair off to discuss ethical questions such as, What are the moral challenges posed by terrorism? Can modern terrorism be addressed within the existing paradigms of just war and international law? Should the U.S. respond militarily or by some other means? Taken together, the essays in this volume ask the fundamental question: How should the United States use its power to combat terrorism? |
Contents
The Ethics of Retaliation | 11 |
Terrorism Innocence and War | 21 |
The Moral Hazards of Military Response | 35 |
The Paradox of Riskless Warfare | 37 |
The War on Terrorism and the End of Human Rights | 51 |
Looking Ahead The Possibility of a Comprehensive Approach | 63 |
Other editions - View all
Common terms and phrases
aggression al Qaeda American application of force appropriate targets argued argument batants bombing civic civil create crime criminal culture David Luban democracy democratic distinction doctrine of double double effect Dumas economic and political enemy combatant enemy soldiers engage ethics Ex parte Quirin fight Fullinwider fundamentalists Geneva Convention goals Grameen Bank human rights hybrid war-law model imposition of risk injury Institute for Philosophy international law intervention Iraq Islamic Judith Lichtenberg justice justify Kahn Kellogg-Briand Pact Kosovo law model legitimacy legitimate targets liberty lives means microlending military force morally guilty morally innocent nation noncombatant immunity nonstate Osama bin Laden Philosophy & Public Philosophy and Public principle Private Judgment protect punishment Qaeda religion religious response retaliation retribution riskless warfare rorism self-defense September 11 attacks social contract sovereignty terrorism terrorists threat tion United University of Maryland unlawful combatants victims violence War on Terrorism Washington Post wrong
Popular passages
Page 8 - O, it is excellent To have a giant's strength ; but it is tyrannous To use it like a giant.