Deck 19: Political Violence: War, Terrorism, and Torture

Question 1

The resort to violence for political ends is referred to as ________.

Answer 1

political violence

Question 2

The leading contemporary advocate for just war theory, Michael Walzer, asserts that terrorism is wrong because

A) terrorists always act from dubious motives.
B) it is an indiscriminate attack on the innocent.
C) terrorist attacks are directed at specific persons for particular reasons.
D) it is perpetrated by nonstate actors.

Answer 2

B

Question 3

Eminent realists of the past and present include

A) Niccolò Machiavelli, Thomas Hobbes, and Henry Kissinger.
B) Henry Kissinger, Reinhold Niebuhr, and Jimmy Carter.
C) Reinhold Niebuhr, Thomas Hobbes, and Barack Obama.
D) Niccolò Machiavelli, George W. Bush, and Henry Kissinger.

Answer 3

A

Question 4

A plausible nonconsequentialist argument for pacifism is

A) war is always wrong because in the deliberate killing of human beings it violates a fundamental right-the right to life.
B) war is never justified, because it always produces more bad than good. The catastrophic loss of life and the widespread destruction of war can never offset whatever political
Or material gains are achieved; riches, land, oil, or power cannot outweigh the carnage.
C) war inevitably leads to more war, and multiple wars can never outweigh the good that might come out of so many conflicts.
D) the loss of even one life in a war is so catastrophically bad that no amount of good resulting from the war could counterbalance it.

Question 5

In just war theory, the justification for resorting to war has traditionally been labeled

A) jus in bello.
B) just cause principle.
C) justice of conflict.
D) jus ad bellum.

Question 6

Consider the "ticking-bomb" scenario, which is used to justify using torture to fight terrorism. Some who are opposed to torture believe that ticking-bomb scenarios are too contrived to be taken seriously; such states of affairs simply don't happen in the real world. A plausible counterargument to this position is that

A) ticking-bomb situations happen all the time.
B) ticking-bomb situations have often been depicted in movies and TV series.
C) in light of what we know about the upbringing of many convicted terrorists, we have good reasons to believe that ticking-bomb situations are possible.
D) in light of what we know about terrorist tactics and aims (and about police cases that resemble ticking-bomb scenarios), we have good reasons to believe that ticking-bomb situations are possible.

Question 7

In 2014 President Barack Obama claimed that the United States should intervene in an attack on the Yezidi people in Iraq by ISIS in order to prevent genocide. An interventionist might argue that the United States was justified in such an attack, just as a bystander would be permitted to intervene if they were to see an innocent person being threatened. Which of the following would be the best response that the noninterventionist could give to the interventionist argument?

A) There is a well-established doctrine of international conduct that one sovereign state may not meddle in the internal affairs of another.
B) Just as a bystander must ask for help in order to justify intervention, the Yezidi people must also ask for help, which they cannot do.
C) A leader of government may not make decisions that will put soldiers in danger, simply for the sake of preventing genocide.
D) Preventing genocide is not a legitimate reason for any nation to engage in aggression.

Question 8

Suppose that terrorism is defined broadly as the deliberate use of violence against noncombatants for political or ideological purposes. In this case the Allied bombings of Dresden and other German cities in World War II and the atomic obliteration of Hiroshima and Nagasaki would be considered

A) acts of war.
B) nonterrorist acts.
C) terrorist acts.
D) unclassifiable actions.

Question 9

Suppose you are a utilitarian, and suppose it is an empirical fact that wars invariably have more bad consequences than good. To be consistent, you then would have to accept the view known as

A) personal pacifism.
B) just war pacifism.
C) realism.
D) antiwar pacifism.

Question 10

Suppose the Iraq War, which began in 2003 when the United States and its allies attacked Iraq, started because President George W. Bush and his advisors feared that Saddam Hussein might be dangerous. And suppose at that time there was no evidence that Iraq was an immediate and imminent threat-that is, there was no evidence that Iraq had nearly completed plans to attack the United States with weapons of mass destruction. If these were the facts, most just war theorists would probably have judged the attack by the United States to be

A) preemptive.
B) justified.
C) unjustified.
D) prudent.

Question 11

The view that war is never morally permissible is known as jus in bello.

Question 12

In war the distinction between combatants and noncombatants is unambiguous and very clear to troops on the ground.

Question 13

Suppose state A launches an unprovoked attack on state B. According to the usual interpretation of just war theory, state B has just cause for going to war against state A-namely

A) revenge.
B) self-defense against attack.
C) expectation of success.
D) profits in war.

Question 14

A war launched because an attack from another state is not actual but merely feared is known as a preventive war.

Question 15

Suppose you are an immunity theorist, and you hear that an attack by American soldiers on a group of twenty ruthless terrorists has resulted in the deaths not only of the terrorists but also of one noncombatant woman. Later it becomes known that the American soldiers knew the noncombatant was among the terrorists and launched the attack nevertheless. As an immunity theorist you would judge this action to be justified but regrettable.

Question 16

Most people believe that violence is prima facie wrong.

Question 17

Suppose you took a Kantian means-ends view of torture. You then would likely judge torture to be

A) morally permissible.
B) morally impermissible.
C) neither right nor wrong.
D) permissible to save lives.

Question 18

The term used to refer to the issue of what acts are morally permissible in war is ________.

A) jus in bello.
B) jus ad bellum.
C) ad hoc jus.
D) jus ad majorum.

Question 19

As defined in the text, the term ________ refers to the physical or psychological attack on, or the vigorous abuse of, persons, causing their suffering, injury, or death.

Question 20

People who should not be intentionally attacked in war are said to have

A) war immunity.
B) state protection.
C) noncombatant immunity.
D) special status.

Question 21

________ is the view that moral standards are not applicable to war and that war must be judged only on how well it serves state interests.

Question 22

One of the ways that people have tried to avoid concluding that the Allied forces' bombing of cities in World War II was terrorism is to limit terrorism only to ________; that is, to individuals or groups that are not sovereign states.

Question 23

The doctrine that war may be morally permissible under stipulated conditions is known as ________.

Question 24

________ is the intentional infliction of severe pain or suffering on people to punish or intimidate them or to extract information from them.

Question 25

According to the text, ________ is violence against noncombatants for political, religious, or ideological ends.