conflict and morality Flashcards

1
Q

consequences for the economy?

A

poverty, infrastructure and employment .

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

define poverty consequence for economy

A

In nearly all conflicts, more people are killed through diseases and malnutrition from fighting itself. This is mainly caused by poverty-during war, in poorer countries, men are not paid to fight but have to in order to survive. As a result, women and children cannot feed themselves or afford medicine. One moral issue of poverty is whether war causes poverty or whether poorer countries are more likely to go to war due to a desire of the government or the people for more power and wealth.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

define infrastructure consequences for economy

A

Destruction of infrastructure can create a catastrophic collapse in the social structure, services, education, and healthcare system. Destruction of schools and education infrastructure has led to a decline in education among many countries affected by war. If certain infrastructural elements such as transport and waste systems are damaged or destroyed, it can cause serious disruption to the other systems such as the economy. One moral issue of infrastructure is whether its destruction matters or not and whether is it the most justified strategy of war. Infrastructure is man-made, so it feels no pain and suffering, so is it okay to destroy it in order to win the war?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

define emplyment consequences for economy

A

Employment usually rises during the war but falls significantly afterward. This is due to a sharp dip in the manufacturing industry but also soldiers’ jobs being replaced during the war and their struggle to find work after, especially given some are injured physically and psychologically. A moral issue of employment is whether it is good for business to be in a state of war or whether this is short-sighted and foolish to want to be at war. Employment rises sharply during the war but usually does the opposite afterward, does this mean that war can be a good thing?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

define consequences for the environment ?

A

ecosystems andf animals

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

define ecosystems consequences of war

A

The impact on ecosystems is wide-ranging. Fuel from damaged or destroyed combat vehicles and ships leak into the soil and oceans and poisons ecosystems. Non-controversial weapons such as biological, chemical, and nuclear are destroying ecosystems and having a long-term impact. A moral issue with ecosystems is whether it only matters because their destruction has an impact on humans.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

define animals consequences of war

A

Animals are considered by many to be negligible victims of war. The main impact of war on animals is the same as on humans: loss of habitat, injury, and death through starvation from loss of food, dehydration through destruction of water supplies, and quite simply being shot or burned to death by guns or explosives. A moral issue with animals is whether or not they have rights during the war. Animals rights activists may claim that they do, but sometimes they could be a necessary consequence of war in order to make a better world.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

consequences for humans

A

homelessness, injury and death

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

define homelessness consequnce for humans

A

One consequence of war is homelessness. This can happen for various reasons, mainly when you fear for your safety during the war and have to flee somewhere, have been ordered out of town, home has been destroyed. A moral implication of homelessness is to what extent foreign countries have a duty to accommodate refugees.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

define injury consequence for humans

A

This can be both physical and psychological. Physical includes loss of limbs through e.g. landmines or anti-personnel weapons (APW). a moral implication with injury is worse than psychological injury, or vice versa. A lot of the time they come together, but what should be prioritised?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

define death as a consequence for humans

A

This is the most obvious and devastating consequence of war. It affects both soldiers and civilians, the old, the young, men and women. The death of a soldier has a knock-on psychological effect of a child losing their father and a woman losing their husband. A moral implication of death is whether the death of a civilian is always worse than a soldier.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

justifications for war

A

resources, oppression and territory

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

define resources as a justification for war

A

Wars declared over resources can be oil, minerals, and others. One moral implication of this war is that there is a worry that drought in africa could dry up the nile and lead to ethiopia holding a lot of power, as 80% of the nile water is made up from Ethiopia’s rain which could lead to a full-scale war.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

define oppression as a justification for war

A

Wars declared over oppression can be in response to the government seizing control of the media or the military denying human rights, and using harsh or unjust punishment. One moral implication of this is oppression can be considered a legitimate reason for declaring war?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

define territory as a justification for war

A

War started due to discover land that contains natural resources. This holds a strategic advantage to gain territory. One moral implication of this is if countries aren’t sharing resources then should you declare a territorial war? Should you surrender your land to the people?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

types of war

A

global, total and limited

17
Q

define global war

A

A global war is when war takes part over 2 or more countries involving perhaps even more countries. For example, ww1 and ww2. A moral issue of this is that the sheer number of civilian casualties does not justify the actions in a world war.

18
Q

define total war

A

Total war is when countries go “all out “ in order to win the war at all costs. Large sacrifices can be made due to this war. For example, japan adopted this approach during ww2. A moral issue of this is that this war can be unfair and one side may be stronger than the other. However, this war usually ends quickly.

19
Q

define limited war

A

A limited war is essentially the opposite of a total war, where countries set a modest budget and investment in a conflict e.g. America’s approach to Afghanistan. A moral issue of this is that limited war may be a waste of time and resources. It is the correct approach given it can minimize casualties.

20
Q

alternatives to war

A

financial sanctions, financial diplomacy and conditional pacifists

21
Q

define financial sanctions

A

Financial sanctions are usually commercial and financial penalties that generally aim to change the behaviour of the gov or ruler in the target country e.g. the USA on consumer goods in Cuba. a moral issue of this is whether they actually punish civilians worse than world leaders.

22
Q

define financial diplomacy

A

Financial diplomacy can be through the use of foreign aid, trade deals, or other types of incentives, as a means to resolving tension. China is using this as a strategy for gaining allies in southeast Asia and Africa. A moral issue of this is whether it is merely a form of exploitation of weaker nations.

23
Q

define conditional pacifists

A

they are against all war and violence in principle, but they accept that there may be circumstances where war will be better than the alternative. a moral issue of ‘picking and choosing’ when is peace the correct alternative? under what conditions?

24
Q

religious responses

A

Christian pacifist, Christian realist and buddhists

25
Q

non religious responses

A

humanist, rule utilitarian and act utilitarians

26
Q

define Christian pacifists

A

Christian pacifists are absolute pacifists, so are against all war in all circumstances. They think conflict can be resolved through peaceful means - Jesus himself was a pacifist. They uphold the sanctity of life and the belief that destroying life is destroying God’s creations. The bible states “Turn from evil and go good, seek peace and pursue it “.

27
Q

define christian realists

A

Christian realists are based on the just war criteria. They see war as a last resort but if certain conditions are met then it is morally justified. For example, the how a war should be fought criteria; discrimination- acts of war should be aimed at combatants, not civilians, minimum force - death and destruction should be limited and proportionality - the force used must be proportional to the wrong endured.

28
Q

define buddhists

A

They are considered absolute pacifists due to their core belief in the avoidance of suffering and non-violence. This also forms part of the 5 precepts in Buddhism, one of which involves abstaining from taking life. The Dhammapada states “All war is monstrous. Its very nature is one of tragedy and suffering”.

29
Q

define humanist

A

Humanists follow 2 key principles of empathy and reason - we should consider the impact that our decisions have on others and use our intelligence to figure out the best course of action. Humanists generally see war as a last resort and as a failure of humans to negotiate and compromise but evil exists and war is sometimes necessary.

30
Q

define act utilitarian

A

Act utilitarians think what is right and wrong depends on the situation e.g. WW11 was a good outcome, and therefore morally justified.