more from this thinker | more from this text
Full Idea
Achieving unconditional surrender can never be a justification for the continuation of war, since there are always conditions that a vanquished adversary, no matter how evil, can be justified in demanding.
Gist of Idea
Unconditional surrender can't be demanded, since evil losers still have legitimate conditions
Source
Jeff McMahan (Killing in War [2009], 3.3.1)
Book Ref
McMahan,Jeff: 'Killing in War' [OUP 2009], p.130
A Reaction
McMahan is particularly discussing Hiroshima, but this also applies to the European war in 1945. Presumably a civilised victor will grant the conditions which the losers would have demanded, and that probably happened in 1945. It's about power.
| 23401 | A military victory is not a thing of beauty [Laozi (Lao Tzu)] |
| 8238 | Seeking peace through war is like looking for fish up a tree [Mengzi (Mencius)] |
| 19783 | A state of war remains after a conquest, if the losers don't accept the winners [Rousseau] |
| 21074 | Some trust in the enemy is needed during wartime, or peace would be impossible [Kant] |
| 24100 | If you don't want war, remove your borders; but you set up borders because you want war [Nietzsche] |
| 23858 | War is perpetuated by its continual preparations [Weil] |
| 23592 | We can only lead war towards peace if we firmly enforce the rules of war [Walzer] |
| 23618 | Unconditional surrender can't be demanded, since evil losers still have legitimate conditions [McMahan] |
| 20691 | Real peace is the implausibility of war (and not just its absence) [Harari] |