Deck 12: The Ethics of War and the Struggle Against Terrorism

Question 1

Lackey advocates a "live and let live" pacifism.

Answer 1

False

Question 2

Anti-war pacifism accepts the "necessity" of killing soldiers during war; however they argue that the killing of civilians is morally wrong, and hence all war is wrong.

Answer 2

False

Question 3

Unlike pacifism, just war theory holds that waging war may sometimes be permissible.

Answer 3

True

Question 4

According to Just War Theory, a country should not wage war unless it has a reasonable chance of success.

Question 5

Margalit and Walzer argue that in combating terrorism the safety of "our" soldiers takes precedence over the safety of "their" civilians.

Question 6

Margalit and Walzer argue that the two senses of just war, just ad bellum and jus in bello must be kept separate.

Question 7

Margalit and Walzer argue that we should not blame soldiers for participating in war, any war.

Question 8

McMahan argues that the practice of torture should be forbidden, always, absolutely despite the fact that there are theoretical cases in which it might be justified.

Question 9

McMahan argues that torture may be justified in the case of the ticking bomb.

Question 10

Moore argues that in the conflict between privacy and security, it is almost always the case that security interests are weightier than privacy interests.

Question 11

Moore argues that the current WikiLeaks movement is a necessary evil.

Question 12

One theory of pacifism rests on the immorality of killing. Which of the following is a common argument advanced by advocates of this view?

A) The Argument from the Biblical Prohibition on Killing
B) The Sacredness of Life Argument
C) The Right to Life Argument
D) All of the above

Question 13

On what grounds does Lackey criticize the Right to Life Argument?

A) He argues that the right to life can be overridden by other considerations, such as political and economic interests.
B) He rejects the "Rights Theory" on the grounds that we can make sense of rights only against a background of accepted social institutions-and in war there are no shared social institutions.
C) He argues that the right to life implies the right to self-defense.
D) All of the above

Question 14

Some people believe that morality does not apply to war. This view is known as __________.

A) Anti-war pacifism
B) Realism
C) Idealism
D) Instrumentalism

Question 15

According to just war theory, waging war can be just only __________.

A) There is just cause
B) There is a reasonable prospect of success.
C) The action is taken by a legitimate authority of the people.
D) All of the above

Question 16

Jus ad bellum deals with the morality of __________.

A) Killing in war
B) Killing noncombatants in war
C) Justice in going to war
D) All of the above

Question 17

According to Just War Theory, war is a great evil and as such states must exhaust all other options before going to war. What other options are mentioned in the reading by Shaw?

A) Diplomacy
B) Cyber attacks on military infrastructure
C) Assassination of key figures
D) All of the above

Question 18

Jus in bello deals with the rules of __________.

A) Conduct in waging war.
B) Reasons for waging war.
C) Projection of success in waging war.
D) All of the above

Question 19

Which of the following is a long accepted principle of jus in bello __________.

A) Principle of Necessity
B) Principle of Proportionality
C) Principle of Discrimination and Noncombatant Immunity
D) All of the above

Question 20

What do Margalit and Walzer say Israel should act if civilians are being used as "human shields"?

A) It is unfortunate that civilians are used as "human shields" but if their governments do not respect their rights, Israel has no obligation to respect their rights either.
B) There are no "innocent civilians" in societies that allow terrorists to operate; therefore a civilian who is being used as a 'human shield" is implicitly an enemy combatant and therefore may be justly killed.
C) Israel should act as if the civilians who are being used as human shields were Israeli citizens.
D) All of the above

Question 21

What does McMahan say about the "ticking bomb" case?

A) Use of torture in this particular case could be justified because it is the lesser of the two evils.
B) Use of torture in this particular case could be justified as an instance of the principle of preventative justice.
C) Use of torture in this particular case is not justified because we cannot know with certainty that the person we are torturing is responsible for the bomb or even has any information about the bomb.
D) Use of torture in this particular case is not justified because torture is categorically wrong.

Question 22

The pacifist believes that no war had done enough to justify killing. Do you think that liberating Europe and stopping the Nazis justifies World War II?

Question 23

Consider each of the following arguments: the Biblical Prohibition on Killing Argument, the Sacredness of Life Argument and the Right to Life Argument. Do you think any of these arguments support an absolute ban on killing? On what grounds does Lackey reject these arguments?

Question 24

Lackey considers the following question: If it is known in advance that civilians will be killed, why is this not murder? Do you think military engagements that result in civilian deaths are always wrong? What about enemy combatants that use woman and children as "human shields"?

Question 25

Consider the following criticism anti-war pacifism: The Nazi concentration camps were not liberated by pacifists; they were liberated by soldiers. How might the pacifist respond to this criticism?

Question 26

Shaw lists six criteria of jus ad bellum or justice in going to war: (1) legitimate authority, (2) just cause, (3) right intention, (4) last resort, (5) proportionality, and (6) reasonable prospect of success. Assess each point. Do you think these criteria are both necessary and sufficient?

Question 27

If jus ad bellum principles are rigorously applied, would the U.S. and/or Israel be justified in a preemptive attack on Iran's nuclear sites? Are preemptive attacks ever justified? Are they justified in keeping certain countries from attaining a nuclear bomb?

Question 28

Margalit and Walzer argue that in combating terrorism the safety of "our" soldiers takes precedence over the safety of "their" civilians. Do you agree or disagree with their claim?

Question 29

Do you think there is a "just" way to kill and an "unjust" way to kill in war? Is dropping bombs just but using chemical and/or biological weapons is unjust? Explain your answer?

Question 30

Describe the ticking bomb case. Do you think the use of torture is justified in this case? Such cases are often described in such as way as to build in the assumption that the person to be tortured really has information that will in fact prevent a greater evil. In reality, when people are tortured those who are doing the torture only believe the person is guilty, only believe there is a bomb ticking away somewhere ready to cause great harm, only believe that torture will save innocent victims from this supposed harm. Are the differences between the ticking bomb case and actual real-time cases relevant to our assessment of the two types of cases?

Question 31

Moore argues that relinquishing privacy for greater security is problematic when there is a lack of accountability. He argues that the WikiLeaks movement is a "necessary evil". First, do an Internet search on "WikiLeaks". Do you think the lack of oversight justifies activities such as WikiLeaks? Discuss.