Just War Doctrine and the Gulf Conflict
In evaluating US involvement in the Iraq conflict in terms of the Just War Doctrine - jus ad bellum and jus in bello - it is my opinion that the US adhered to the Doctrine in its entirety. The US acted justly both in its entering into the Gulf conflict (jus ad bellum) and in its conduct while in the conflict (jus in bello). To support this opinion I will individually address the co parts that constitute the Just War Doctrine and show how US participation in the Iraq war abstained from violating the tenets of either co-part.
Jus Ad Bellum
Jus Ad Bellum, the justness of entering into conflict consists of six primary tenets: legitimate authority, just cause, proportionality, right intention, chance of success, and last resort.
1. Legitimate Authority - Only those of legitimate authority may justly lead its country into war.
This tenet disqualify revolutionaries, radicals and/or subversives who seek to justly initiate war. War is to be the decisions of the head of state and is to be subject to their guidance.
2. Just Cause - A just conflict may not be initiated void of just cause. This tenet disallows justifying war for the purpose of economic gain, land acquisition, or strategic position. If war is to be justly initiated just cause, usually humanitarian, must first exist.
3. Right Intention - This relates to the tenet of just cause. Just cause must be followed by right intention. It would be unjust seek a goal devoid of the just cause.
4. Proportionality - Also in relation to just cause is the tenet of proportionality. Proportionality must exist between the cause and the decision to go to war. For country (a) to initiate a total war with country (b) because of...