Results for 'jus in bello'

1000+ found
Order:
  1.  11
    Jus in bello, Rape and the British Army in the American Revolutionary War.Holger Hoock - 2015 - Journal of Military Ethics 14 (1):74-97.
    This essay offers a case study in jus in bello in the American Revolutionary War by focusing on responses to sexual violence committed against American women by soldiers in the occupying British army and their Loyalist auxiliaries. Two main bodies of sources are juxtaposed in order to explore the contexts and manner in which jus in bello was adjudicated: British courts-martial and American Congressional investigations documenting British and Loyalist breaches of the codes of war. By putting the fragmentary (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2.  17
    Jus in bello Necessity, The Requirement of Minimal Force, and Autonomous Weapons Systems.Alexander Blanchard & Mariarosaria Taddeo - 2022 - Journal of Military Ethics 21 (3):286-303.
    In this article we focus on the jus in bello principle of necessity for guiding the use of autonomous weapons systems (AWS). We begin our analysis with an account of the principle of necessity as entailing the requirement of minimal force found in Just War Theory, before highlighting the absence of this principle in existing work on AWS. Overlooking this principle means discounting the obligations that combatants have towards one another in times of war. We argue that the requirement (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  3.  21
    Jus in bello Necessity, The Requirement of Minimal Force, and Autonomous Weapons Systems.Alexander Blanchard & Mariarosaria Taddeo - 2023 - Journal of Military Ethics 21 (3):286-303.
    In this article we focus on the jus in bello principle of necessity for guiding the use of autonomous weapons systems (AWS). We begin our analysis with an account of the principle of necessity as entailing the requirement of minimal force found in Just War Theory, before highlighting the absence of this principle in existing work on AWS. Overlooking this principle means discounting the obligations that combatants have towards one another in times of war. We argue that the requirement (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  4. The jus in bello in historical and philosophical perspective.Nicholas Rengger - 2008 - In Larry May (ed.), War: Essays in Political Philosophy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  5.  17
    Practical Pacifism,jus in bello, and citizen responsibility.Andrew Fiala - 2006 - Ethical Perspectives 13 (4):673-697.
    This article discusses how ordinary citizens might apply principles of jus in bello. It reaches a sceptical conclusion about citizens’ capacity to apply these principles and connects this with a practical approach to pacifism or, what might also be called, just-war pacifism.This discussion is oriented around events in the war in Iraq including the use of cluster bombs and the commission of war crimes. It uses these events to discuss the question of jus in bello and to also (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  6. Proxy Battles in Just War Theory: Jus in Bello, the Site of Justice, and Feasibility Constraints.Seth Lazar & Laura Valentini - 2017 - In David Sobel, Peter Vallentyne & Steven Wall (eds.), Oxford Studies in Political Philosophy, Volume 3. Oxford University Press. pp. 166-193.
    Interest in just war theory has boomed in recent years, as a revisionist school of thought has challenged the orthodoxy of international law, most famously defended by Michael Walzer [1977]. These revisionist critics have targeted the two central principles governing the conduct of war (jus in bello): combatant equality and noncombatant immunity. The first states that combatants face the same permissions and constraints whether their cause is just or unjust. The second protects noncombatants from intentional attack. In response to (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  7.  22
    Environmental Ethics of War: Jus ad Bellum, Jus in Bello, and the Natural Environment.Tamar Meisels - 2023 - Conatus 8 (2):399-429.
    The conduct of hostilities is very bad for the environment, yet relatively little attention has been focused on environmental military ethics by just war theorists and revisionist philosophers of war. Contemporary ecological concerns pose significant challenges to jus in bello. I begin by briefly surveying existing literature on environmental justice during wartime. While these jus in bello environmental issues have been addressed only sparsely by just war theorists, environmental jus ad bellum has rarely been tackled within JWT or (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  8.  60
    A Realistic and Effective Constraint on the Resort to Force? Pre-commitment to Jus in Bello and Jus Post Bellum as Part of the Criterion of Right Intention.Annalisa Koeman - 2007 - Journal of Military Ethics 6 (3):198-220.
    This paper explores Brian Orend's contribution to the just war tradition, specifically his proposed jus post bellum criteria and his idea of pre-commitment to jus in bello and jus post bellum as part of an expanded jus ad bellum criterion of right intention. The latter is based on his interpretation of Kant's work: that as part of the original decision to begin a war, a state should commit itself to certain rules of conduct and appropriate war termination, and if (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  9.  23
    A Contagion of Violence: The Ideal of Jus in Bello versus the Realities of Fighting on the New York Frontier during the Revolutionary War.James Kirby Martin - 2015 - Journal of Military Ethics 14 (1):57-73.
    European Enlightenment thinkers like Emer de Vattel in his epic work The Laws of Nations argued that engaging in warfare should comply, as much as possible, with humane rules in the treatment of both combatants and noncombatants. Encapsulated by the phrase jus in bello, or justice in warfare, the question remains whether this idealist doctrine had application in military actions conducted during the Revolutionary War fought over the issue of American independence. This essay concludes that in such frontier regions (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  10. The moral inequality of soldiers: Why jus in Bello asymmetry is half right.David Rodin - 2008 - In David Rodin & Henry Shue (eds.), Just and Unjust Warriors: The Moral and Legal Status of Soldiers. Oxford University Press. pp. 44--68.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   21 citations  
  11. Honor in the military and the possible implication for the traditional separation of jus ad bellum and jus in bello.Jacob Blair - 2011 - In Applied Ethics Series (Center for Applied Ethics and Philosophy). pp. 94-102.
    Traditional just war theory maintains that the two types of rules that govern justice in times of war, jus ad bellum (justice of war) and jus in bello (justice in war), are logically independent of one another. Call this the independence thesis. According to this thesis, a war that satisfies the ad bellum rules does not guarantee that the in bello rules will be satisfied; and a war that violates the ad bellum rules does not guarantee that the (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  12.  91
    The just war tradition and its modern legacy: Jus ad bellum_ and _jus in bello.David Boucher - 2012 - European Journal of Political Theory 11 (2):92-111.
    The relationship between jus ad bellum and jus in bello has been characterized differently throughout European history. There have been three main positions exemplified by Hugo Grotius, Samuel von Pufendorf and Emer de Vattel. They are, first, both the cause and the conduct of warfare must be just; second, the cause must be just, but the conduct of the war is unconstrained in order to achieve the goal of peace; and, third, we must assume justice on both sides, and (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  13.  32
    Jus ex Bello in Afghanistan.Darrel Moellendorf - 2011 - Ethics and International Affairs 25 (2):155-164.
    I agree with Professor Miller that just war theory is limited when it comes to judging whether and how to end a war. But Miller fails to understand adequately what these limitations are and the extent to which they can be addressed within just war theory.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  14.  24
    Introduction to the Special Issue: Jus in Bello.Paul Robinson - 2005 - Journal of Military Ethics 4 (2):83-84.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  15.  15
    Interpreting Just War Theory's Jus in Bello Criterion of Discrimination.Camillo C. Bica - 1998 - Public Affairs Quarterly 12 (2):157-168.
  16. Is the Independent Application of Jus in Bello the way to Limit War?Anthony Coates - 2008 - In David Rodin & Henry Shue (eds.), Just and Unjust Warriors: The Moral and Legal Status of Soldiers. Oxford University Press.
  17.  40
    Two Doctrines of Jus ex Bello.Darrel Moellendorf - 2015 - Ethics 125 (3):653-673.
    This article discusses two doctrines of jus ex bello concerning whether and how to end wars. In Section I, I defend the claim that there is a distinct morality of ending wars. Section II rebuts a challenge that the account is too permissive of war. Section III rejects a forward-looking conception of proportionality for jus ex bello. In Section IV, I allow an exception in cases in which the just cause for the war has changed. In Section V, (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  18.  33
    Rousseau’s critique of Grotius’ Jus ad bellum and Jus in bello.Evaldo Becker - 2015 - Trans/Form/Ação 38 (s1):139-152.
    RESUMO:Nosso objetivo no presente artigo é apresentar algumas das principais críticas dirigidas por Rousseau às ideias acerca do direito “da” e principalmente “na” guerra, tal como aparecem na obra de Hugo Grotius. Rousseau insiste para que seus leitores não esqueçam “de jeito nenhum” que ele não procura “[...] o que torna a guerra vantajosa àquele que o faz, mas o que a torna legítima.” E lembra que “[...] sempre há um custo em ser justo”, mas que isso não é motivo (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  19.  35
    Ending War Short of Victory? A Contractarian View of Jus Ex Bello.Daniel Statman - 2015 - Ethics 125 (3):720-750.
    In light of the enormous suffering brought about by war, war might be justified only if the benefit it yields is significant enough, namely, a clear and durable victory over the enemy. The logic of this argument leads to a Clausewitz-style war of “annihilation.” I argue that the best way to justify the ending of war short of such annihilation is by relying on a contractarian view of jus ex bello. I conclude by exploring the implications of this view (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  20.  34
    The Legacy of Jus Contra Bellum: Echoes of Pacifism in Contemporary Just War Thought.Serena K. Sharma - 2009 - Journal of Military Ethics 8 (3):217-230.
    This article explores the issue of jus contra bellum as a particular development within just war thought. At its heart, the jus contra bellum amounts to an attempt to apply the principles of jus in bello (discrimination and proportionality) in order to negate the jus ad bellum. This approach was rather prevalent throughout the Cold War era, as concerns over the prospective use of nuclear weapons facilitated an increasingly sceptical attitude towards the use of force. Whereas the vast majority (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  21.  47
    Unsatisfying Wars: Degrees of Risk and the Jus ex Bello.Gabriella Blum & David Luban - 2015 - Ethics 125 (3):751-780.
    We suggest thinking about the beginning and ending of wars as an exercise in risk management. We argue that states, like individual citizens, must accept that some degree of security risk is inevitable when coexisting with others. We offer two principles for the just management of military risk. The first principle is Morally Justified Bearable Risk, which demands that parties at war temper their claims of justice with the realities of an anarchic and conflicted international system. The second principle, Minimum (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  22.  27
    Moral Injury, Jus Ad Bellum, and Conscientious Refusal.Fiala Andrew - 2017 - Essays in Philosophy 18 (2):281-294.
    Although jus in bello violations create transgressive acts that cause moral injury, the primary consideration in thinking about moral injury should be jus ad bellum. If one is fighting in an ad bellum just war, then transgressive acts can be rationalized in a way that allows for consolation. But for morally sensitive combatants engaged in an ad bellum unjust war, consolation is more difficult since there is no way to justify or rationalize morally problematic deeds committed in defense of (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  23. The ethics of killing in war.Jeff McMahan - 2004 - Ethics 114 (4):693-733.
    The traditional theory of the just war comprises two sets of principles, one governing the resort to war ( jus ad bellum) and the other governing the conduct of war ( jus in bello). The two sets of principles are regarded, in Michael Walzer’s words, as “logically independent. It is perfectly possible for a just war to be fought unjustly and for an unjust war to be fought in strict accordance with the rules.”1 Let us say that those who (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   120 citations  
  24.  40
    Moral Injury and Jus Ad Bellum.Andrew Fiala - 2017 - Essays in Philosophy 18 (2):281-294.
    Although jus in bello violations create transgressive acts that cause moral injury, the primary consideration in thinking about moral injury should be jus ad bellum. If one is fighting in an ad bellum just war, then transgressive acts can be rationalized in a way that allows for consolation. But for morally sensitive combatants engaged in an ad bellum unjust war, consolation is more difficult since there is no way to justify or rationalize morally problematic deeds committed in defense of (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  25. Order and Affray: Defensive Privileges in Warfare.Toby Handfield & Patrick Emerton - 2009 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 37 (4):382 - 414.
    Just war theory is a difficult, even paradoxical, philosophical topic. It is not just that warfare involves large-scale, organised, deliberate killing, and hence might seem the very paradigm of immorality. The just war tradition sharply divorces the question of whether or not it is permissible to resort to war – the question of jus ad bellum – from the question of how and against whom one may inflict harm once at war – the question of jus in bello. As (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  26.  21
    Tactical Jus ad bellum: The Practice and Ethics of Military Designations of Friend and Foe.Celestino Perez - 2021 - Journal of Military Ethics 20 (3-4):217-236.
    The just-war framework neatly distinguishes between jus ad bellum, the criteria that address political leaders’ decisions for waging war, and jus in bello, the criteria that address soldiers’ condu...
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  27.  49
    Considerações sobre a Guerra E Paz em meio à soberania Das nações.Augusto Bach - 2013 - Cadernos de Ética E Filosofia Política 22:105-121.
    In spite all the efforts made by pundits and policy-makers nowadays, the article intends to show how the concepts of jus in bello and jus ad bellum have been misjudged and misinterpreted along its own consolidation in our juridical thought. We also believe they deserve a new approach opened by Foucault´s point of view. In doing so, the issues of sovereignty, war and peace are all reviewed before a genealogical approach which opens us a different window to access the (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  28.  42
    Jus Post Bellum and Political Reconciliation.Colleen Murphy & Linda Radzik - 2013 - In Larry May & Edenberg Elizabeth (eds.), Jus Post Bellum and Transitional Justice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    The category of jus post bellum is a welcome addition to discussions of the justice of war. But, despite its handy Latin label, we will argue that it cannot be properly understood merely as a set of corollaries from jus ad bellum and jus in bello. Instead, an acceptable theory of justice in the postwar period will have to draw on a broader set of normative ideas than those that have been the focus of the just war tradition. In (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  29.  20
    Jus Interruptus Bellum: The Ethics of Truce-Making.Thaddeus Metz - 2017 - Journal of Global Ethics 13 (1):6-13.
    With his new book, A Theory of Truces, Nir Eisikovits has succeed in producing the most comprehensive and insightful book to exist on the nature and morality of truces during international military conflict. In it he plausibly argues that thought about such conflict should avoid binary terms such as long-lasting peace and all-out war, and instead must readily acknowledge conditions “in between” them, such as cease-fires and agreements to limit belligerence to certain times. In this critical notice of Eisikovits’ book, (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  30. The Place of Political Forgiveness in Jus post Bellum.Leonard Kahn - forthcoming - In Court Lewis (ed.), Underrepresented Perspectives on Forgiveness. Vernon Press.
    Jus post Bellum is, like Jus ad Bellum and Jus in Bello, a part of just war theory. Jus post Bellum is distinguished from the other parts of just war theory by being primarily concerned with the principles necessary for securing a just and lasting peace after the end of a war. Traditionally, jus post bellum has focused primarily on three goals: [1] compensating those who have been the victims of unjust aggression, while respecting the rights of the aggressors, (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  31. Drone Warfare and Just War Theory.Harry van der Linden - 2015 - In Marjorie Cohn (ed.), Drones and Targeted Killing. Northampton, Mass.: Olive Branch Press, Interlink Books. pp. 169-194.
    This book chapter addresses two questions. First, can targeted killing by drones in non-battlefield zones be justified on basis of just war theory? Second, will the proliferation and expansion of combat drones in warfare, including the introduction of autonomous drones, be an obstacle to initiating or executing wars in a just manner in the future? The first question is answered by applying traditional jus ad bellum and jus in bello principles to the American targeted killing campaign in Pakistan; the (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  32.  10
    Just Military Preparedness (Jus ante Bellum): A New Category of Just War Theory.Harry van der Linden - manuscript
    This presentation discusses why just war theory is in need of just military preparedness (jus ante bellum) as a new category of just war thinking and it articulates six principles of just military preparedness. The paper concludes that the United States fails to satisfy any of these principles and addresses how this bears on the application of jus ad bellum, jus in bello, and jus post bellum norms to possible future American military interventions.
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  33.  74
    Toward Reconstructing the Jus Ad Bellum.James Turner Johnson - 1973 - The Monist 57 (4):461-488.
    In its classic form the doctrine of the just war, whether enunciated by theological or secular theorists, had two main components: the jus ad bellum, which defined the morally acceptable limits within which a sovereign could and even should go to war, and the jus in bello, which set limits to the conduct of war. By contrast, today the problem of just limitation of war is addressed almost entirely by legal and theoretical attempts to refine the jus in (...), while there exists only a morally truncated and politically ineffective jus ad bellum. What is the contemporary status of the jus ad bellum and what makes it politically and morally inadequate are the issues I wish to address directly in this paper. Indirectly, however, I wish to speak to more fundamental questions: what are the ingredients of a moral doctrine limiting resort to war, and what is required for this to be politically workable as well? The final goal, which is far beyond the scope of this paper, is to reconstruct for our own time a doctrine on the just limitation of war which would restore the dual thrust of just war doctrine in its classic form. (shrink)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  34.  71
    The Logical Structure of Just War Theory.Christopher Toner - 2010 - The Journal of Ethics 14 (2):81-102.
    A survey of just war theory literature reveals the existence of quite different lists of principles. This apparent arbitrariness raises a number of questions: What is the relation between ad bellum and in bello principles? Why are there so many of the former and so few of the latter? What order is there among the various principles? To answer these questions, I first draw on some recent work by Jeff McMahan to show that ad bellum and in bello (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  35. Terrorism.Suzanne Uniacke - 2018 - In Seth Lazar & Helen Frowe (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Ethics of War. Oxford University Press.
    This article explores the connection between terrorism and the ethics of war, specifically the relevance of the moral wrongfulness of terrorism in elucidating one important aspect of the ethics of war. It begins with an overview of terrorism’s central features and the ethical issues associated with terrorism. It then discusses two considerations. First, terrorism can occur within civil society as well as in contexts of armed combat or war. Second, terrorist tactics are answerable to principles that govern ethically acceptable conduct (...)
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  36. Assembling an army: considerations for just war theory.Nathan P. Stout - 2016 - Journal of Global Ethics 12 (2):204-221.
    ABSTRACTThe aim of this paper is to draw attention to an issue which has been largely overlooked in contemporary just war theory – namely the impact that the conditions under which an army is assembled are liable to have on the judgments that are made with respect to traditional principles of jus ad bellum and jus in bello. I argue that the way in which an army is assembled can significantly alter judgments regarding the justice of a war. In (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  37.  38
    Proportionality and Just War.Gary D. Brown - 2003 - Journal of Military Ethics 2 (3):171-185.
    Despite its preeminent position in the just war tradition, the concept of proportionality is not well understood by military leaders. Especially lacking is a realization that there are four distinct types of proportionality. In determining whether a particular resort to war is just, national leaders must consider the proportionality of the conflict, i.e., balance the expected gain or just redress against the total harm likely to be inflicted by the impending armed action. This proportionality consideration is called jus ad bellum (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  38.  8
    La guerre peut-elle être juste?: réflexions sur le jus post bellum.Philippe Assalé - 2018 - Paris: L'Harmattan.
    La 4e de couv. indique : "La guerre peut-elle être juste? Peut-elle s'affubler d'un qualificatif juste sans injustice? Les récits cosmogoniques sont la merveilleuse monstration que les hommes se sont toujours fait la guerre. L'attitude belliqueuse de certains souverains et les atrocités des champs de bataille ont amené des analystes à définir des critères stricts pour limiter la souffrance humaine. Désormais, tout Etat qui n'observerait pas scrupuleusement les linéaments de cet édit risque d'être déclaré Hostis humani generis. Dans sa conception (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  39.  95
    A Critique of the Right Intention Condition as an Element of Jus ad Bellum.Greg Janzen - 2016 - Journal of Military Ethics 15 (1):36-57.
    According to just war theory, a resort to war is justified only if it satisfies the right intention condition. This article offers a critical examination of this condition, defending the thesis that, despite its venerable history as part of the just war tradition, it ought to be jettisoned. When properly understood, it turns out to be an unnecessary element of jus ad bellum, adding nothing essential to our assessments of the justice of armed conflict.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  40.  58
    When is it Right to Fight? International Law and Jus ad Bellum.Alex J. Bellamy - 2009 - Journal of Military Ethics 8 (3):231-245.
    James Turner Johnson has played a pivotal role in bringing just war thinking to the fore in international relations. This has brought with it increased interest in the relationship between the just war tradition and the laws of war. Whilst Johnson maintains that the legal rules relating to the conduct of war correspond with the requirements of jus in bello, he is more critical of the legal regime relating to recourse to force and has occasionally argued in favour of (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  41.  11
    Proportionality and Just War.Gary D. Brown - 2003 - Journal of Military Ethics 2 (3):171-185.
    Despite its preeminent position in the just war tradition, the concept of proportionality is not well understood by military leaders. Especially lacking is a realization that there are four distinct types of proportionality. In determining whether a particular resort to war is just, national leaders must consider the proportionality of the conflict, i.e., balance the expected gain or just redress against the total harm likely to be inflicted by the impending armed action. This proportionality consideration is called jus ad bellum (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  42.  71
    Forgotten victims of military humanitarian intervention: A case for the principle of reparation?Shunzo Majima - 2009 - Philosophia 37 (2):203-209.
    The purpose of this article is briefly to present a case for the principle of reparation as a new jus in bello principle for just humanitarian intervention. The article is divided into three sections. In “Restorative Justice and Civilian Protection”, I investigate the idea of restorative justice in order to consider whether or not it can complement the shortcomings of the just war tradition in civilian protection. In “The Legal Framework on Reparation: Its Scope and Limitations”, I examine the (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  43. The Just War Framework.Helen Frowe - 2018 - In Seth Lazar & Helen Frowe (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Ethics of War. Oxford University Press. pp. 41-58.
    Much work in the ethics of war is structured around the distinction between jus ad bellum and jus in bello. This distinction has two key roles. It distinguishes two evaluative objects—the war ‘as a whole’, and the conduct of combatants during the war—and identifies different moral principles as relevant to each. I argue that we should be sceptical of this framework. I suggest that a single set of principles determines the justness of actions that cause nonconsensual harm. If so, (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  44.  9
    Night of the Living Dead Demons and a Life Worth Living.John Edgar Browning - 2013-09-05 - In Galen A. Foresman (ed.), Supernatural and Philosophy. Wiley. pp. 95–107.
    Supernatural fans often associate Season 3's popular “Jus in Bello” episode with the world's quintessential zombie movie, George Romero's Night of the Living Dead. Romero's zombie films, beginning with Night, fill the survival space with multiple, diverse survivalists who are forced to work through personal differences stemming from jealousy and petty annoyance to racism and bigotry, issues of morality, theology, and other social and cultural differences. Indeed, the setting is the first link to Romero's Night, whose cramped Pennsylvanian farmhouse (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  45.  43
    The War Trap: Dilemmas of jus terminatio.David Rodin - 2015 - Ethics 125 (3):674-695.
    Important moral dilemmas arise in the context of what I have called jus terminatio and Darrel Moellendorf has called jus ex bello—the norms governing the termination of war. I discuss three dilemmas, showing how they also illuminate proportionality and jus ad bellum: morally accounting for new costs that arise during the course of a war; two variants of the “sunk-cost dilemma” in which an agent is permitted to contribute to a project that is all things considered morally unjust, when (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  46.  3
    Proportionality in international law.Michael A. Newton - 2014 - New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Edited by Larry May.
    Introduction -- What is proportionality? -- Proportionality : a multiplicity of meanings -- Proportionality in the just war tradition -- Proportionality in international humanitarian law -- Proportionality in human rights law and morality -- The uniqueness of jus in bello proportionality -- Countermeasures and counterinsurgency -- Human shields and risk -- Targeted killings and proportionality in law : two models -- The nature of war and the idea of "cyberwar" -- Thresholds of jus in bello proportionality.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  47. Necessity in Human Rights Law and IHL.Larry May & Jens David Ohlin - 2016 - In Jens David Ohlin & Larry May (eds.), Necessity in International Law. Oxford University Press USA.
    This chapter contrasts jus in bello necessity with necessity as the concept is used in human rights thinking. The task here is to explain what is distinctive about jus in bello necessity and to explain why conceptions of necessity that reign in other areas of international law cannot be automatically grafted onto the laws of war without reflection and deliberation. Indeed, any attempt to transplant a more restrictive version of necessity will result in a substantial alteration of the (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  48.  55
    Reliable Old Wineskins: The Applicability of the Just War Tradition to Military Cyber Operations.Edward T. Barrett - 2015 - Philosophy and Technology 28 (3):387-405.
    This article argues that the traditional jus ad bellum and jus in bello criteria are fully capable of providing the ethical guidance needed to legitimately conduct military cyber operations. The first part examines the criteria’s foundations by focusing on the notion of liability to defensive harm worked out by revisionist just war thinkers. The second part critiques the necessity of alternative frameworks, which its proponents assert are required to at least supplement the traditional just war criteria. Using the latter, (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  49.  22
    Necessity in International Law.Jens David Ohlin & Larry May - 2016 - Oxford University Press USA.
    Necessity is a notoriously dangerous and slippery concept-dangerous because it contemplates virtually unrestrained killing in warfare and slippery when used in conflicting ways in different areas of international law. Jens David Ohlin and Larry May untangle these confusing strands and perform a descriptive mapping of the ways that necessity operates in legal and philosophical arguments in jus ad bellum, jus in bello, human rights, and criminal law. Although the term "necessity" is ever-present in discussions regarding the law and ethics (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  50. Applying the rules of just war theory to engineers in the arms industry.Aaron Fichtelberg - 2006 - Science and Engineering Ethics 12 (4):685-700.
    Given the close relationship between the modern arms industry and the military, engineers and other professionals who work in the arms industry should be held accountable to the principles of just war theory. While they do not deploy weapons on the battlefield and are not in the military chain of command, technical professionals nonetheless have a moral duty to abide by principles of jus ad bellum and jus in bello. They are morally responsible both for choosing the companies that (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
1 — 50 / 1000