more on this theme     |     more from this text

Single Idea 23604

[filed under theme 25. Social Practice / E. Policies / 1. War / c. Combatants ]

Full Idea

When soldiers go to war, they undoubtedly assume a certain risk. They voluntarily expose themselves to a significant risk of being attacked. But this is entirely different from consenting to being attacked.

Gist of Idea

Volunteer soldiers accept the risk of attack, but they don't agree to it, or to their deaths

Source

Jeff McMahan (Killing in War [2009], 2.2.1)

Book Ref

McMahan,Jeff: 'Killing in War' [OUP 2009], p.52

A Reaction

This is his response to Walzer's thought that soldiers resemble people who volunteer for a boxing match. The sailors at Pearl Harbour obviously didn't consent to the attack, or accept the Japanese right to kill them.

The 23 ideas from Jeff McMahan

23594 Wars can be unjust, despite a just cause, if they are unnecessary or excessive or of mixed cause [McMahan]
23595 The worst unjustified wars have no aim at all [McMahan]
23596 If all combatants are seen as morally equal, that facilitates starting unjust wars [McMahan]
23598 You (e.g. a police officer) are not liable to attack just because you pose a threat [McMahan]
23597 Just war theory says all and only persons posing a threat are liable to attack [McMahan]
23600 Proportionality in fighting can't be judged independently of the justice of each side [McMahan]
23599 You don't become a legitimate target, just because you violently resist an unjust attack [McMahan]
23602 Innocence implies not being morally responsible, rather than merely being guiltless [McMahan]
23603 Can an army start an unjust war, and then fight justly to defend their own civilians? [McMahan]
23604 Volunteer soldiers accept the risk of attack, but they don't agree to it, or to their deaths [McMahan]
23605 Soldiers cannot know enough facts to evaluate the justice of their war [McMahan]
23606 Liberty Rights are permissions, and Claim Rights are freedom from intervention [McMahan]
23608 If being part of a big collective relieves soldiers of moral responsibility, why not the leaders too? [McMahan]
23610 If soldiers can't refuse to fight in unjust wars, can they choose to fight in just wars? [McMahan]
23611 Soldiers cannot freely fight in unjust wars, just because they behave well when fighting [McMahan]
23612 The law of war differs from criminal law; attacking just combatants is immoral, but legal [McMahan]
23613 Equality is both sides have permission, or both sides are justified, or one justified the other permitted [McMahan]
23615 Fighting unjustly under duress does not justify it, or permit it, but it may excuse it [McMahan]
23616 Legal excuses are duress, ignorance, and diminished responsibility [McMahan]
23617 If the unjust combatants are morally excused they are innocent, so how can they be killed? [McMahan]
23618 Unconditional surrender can't be demanded, since evil losers still have legitimate conditions [McMahan]
23619 A defensive war is unjust, if it is responding to a just war [McMahan]
23620 A person or state may be attacked if they are responsible for an unjustified threat [McMahan]