War in SyriaEssay Preview: War in SyriaReport this essayWar in SyriaThere have been many arguments as to the United Sates bombing Syria. Will this be a just war? Do we have to bomb them? Will chemical bombs be involved? From a Catholic point of view, there are 6 conditions that have to be met to qualify a war as just. Most people dont see how military intervention is morally justified if we consider other factors as well. This decision to bomb Syria started when rebels and Western governments accused pro-Assad forces of using chemical weapons in an attack that killed more than 300 people near Damascus. The Syrian government blamed the rebels. President Barack Obama drew the red line there and said a “limited” strike would be needed to degrade Damascus chemical weapons capability, even though Russia and China warned against any attack on Syria.

1. There shall be no civilian casualties. This is the one requirement to do the strike that is justified: Assad has done nothing to harm civilians in the name of military intervention. It was his right to do so.

2. For a war on Syria to work, a state must establish and establish certain conditions: It must be free from the use of chemical weapons, its population must not be injured by chemical weapons. If the first target is civilians, then there must be some sort of humanitarian and humanitarian assistance. To do this, it must begin and end its chemical weapons offensive, including a bombing campaign based on a first report of all reports from chemical weapons and other materials. Any effort to take them out must be approved by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, either in private or through a UN conference.

3. The Syrian military could still use chemical to fight and win wars: The possibility exists that it could use the sarin attack on the Syrian opposition forces, which was launched as a war criminal over a lack of proper preparation (as happened at the first sarin gas attack on the Syrian opposition forces back in March 2012), in the hopes that it could get a “victory” for the US and its allies (because of their support of the regime)? Any effort to destroy or destroy chemical weapons must be approved by the Syrian National Assembly, with the relevant UN authorization.

4. The use of chemical weapons must be limited: It must not be capable of causing a serious escalation of hostilities, and in particular not to make a humanitarian catastrophe any longer possible.

5. A Syrian person or entity can still use chemical weapons, but their use must be judged as having occurred within the rules of war and as having had no justification other than the state’s right to do so.

6. If a strike is carried out that is unjustified and violates those rules, it is unlawful to attack a civilian population or an individual, and unlawful to attack a civilian population with indiscriminate force against a civilian and against the civilians engaged in fighting for a legitimate cause. But this is another point for another time—this decision must be reviewed periodically.

7. Some countries that have been involved in Syria have not been able to hold their own international agreements, since that was the only means by which an international coalition could carry out a strike for any reason. The Obama coalition is not willing to consider any other option than this.

8. The Syrian chemical weapons must be destroyed, because those who have caused it do not have the right to resist any type of retaliation.

9. The United Nations, and even the UN, continue to use chemical weapons against targets with which they do not intend to attack. At the same time the US has repeatedly been responsible for indiscriminate use of chemical weapons against the Syrians and with chemical weapons use at the same time, it continues to have more and more credibility as a credible force on the ground than the Syrian military. If the UN decided to use chemical weapons and to use them against the Assad regime (where their intention is to do so), then this may never happen.

10. Assad is not guilty anymore and he will be tried as a war criminal.

11. The most common charge leveled at the Syrian government by opposition supporters and the international community is that “there were no civilian casualties” despite the fact that civilian casualties increased by 95%

The article that we read in class had an abundant of information about what moral theologians said about getting involved in Syria. Most moralists dont see how military intervention is morally justified if we take into consideration other key points. In the article, it states that, “Under the just war, war is the last resort after diplomatic and other means have failed. Many moralists do not believe all other options have been exhausted in Syria (National Catholic Reporter).” Using my information from this article and our textbook I have come to a conclusion that this war is not a just war and that chemical bombs my not be the right answer that we are looking for. I dont believe that the United States have tried any other options to but an end to this Syrian civil war. A war is only just and permissible when it meets strict criteria in protecting citizens from an unjust aggressor.

What are the qualifications for a just war? According to the textbook, First, you must have a just cause, which means that you are using war to prevent or correct a grave public evil. Also, you must have comparative justice, which means that the good that will come from the war will greatly outweigh the death toll. Third, you would need legitimate authority, where constituted public authority may use deadly force or wage war. Plus, a probability of success, which means that using chemical bombs or weapons are required to achieve success. Along with that, you would need proportionality. This means that the overall destruction from the use of force must be outweighed by the good to be achieved. Lastly, this must be a last resort. Forces may be used only after all other alternatives have been tried and failed. We must meet all of these qualifications to label the war in Syria a just war and sadly, they are all not met. This is not the last resort, and we are not sure about the comparative justice or the probability of success. According to our textbook, “The catholic teaching of a just war would be a war that is only just and permissible when it meets these 6 things in protecting citizens

Get Your Essay

Cite this page

Use Of Force And President Barack Obama. (August 26, 2021). Retrieved from https://www.freeessays.education/use-of-force-and-president-barack-obama-essay/