(June 24, 2015 at 12:38 am)SnakeOilWarrior Wrote:(June 23, 2015 at 10:09 pm)SnakeOilWarrior Wrote: So, soldiers defending their units in one of the unjust Bush oil wars are immoral then?!? Those are not examples of war we fought to defend ourselves.
(June 23, 2015 at 10:34 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: The soldiers defending themselves was not immoral. But I do think the decision to go to war was. I don't know all the ins and outs of it, but I remember the pope of the time being very much against it. So chances are I probably would too if I knew.
(edited. sorry, i'm watching a movie)
(June 23, 2015 at 10:48 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I don't see how what I said above negates my earlier statement about just war.
(June 23, 2015 at 11:38 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: No, I said it wasn't.
So, at this point I'm not even sure what to take from this. You seem to think that killing in a just war is moral, but immoral if the war is unjust. Ok. Then you make opposing statements about whether Bush's wars are just.
Killing is moral in a just war. Is Bush's oil war just and if not, are the soldiers defending their units from the "enemy" moral or immoral.
Your questions was this:
"So, soldiers defending their units in one of the unjust Bush oil wars are immoral then?!?"
My answer was this:
"The soldiers defending themselves was not immoral. But I do think the decision to go to war was."
Killing in self defense is always justifiable, regardless of whether you're in a war or not, or whether it's a just war or not.
Sorry if it can get confusing on here. I hope that clears it up.
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
-walsh
-walsh
