ANSWERS: 1
  • Primarily: in self-defense. * Secondarily: in defense of one's allies. * Conceivably there are other times, such as: when a nation severely restricts some thing that is literally a necessity for another nation. For example: consider a river flowing through two nations, with large cities and millions of acres of farming land in both nations completely dependent on the water in that river. The upstream nation dams the river and uses the water for irrigation to increase the amount of farmland. The river reduces to a thoroughly-polluted trickle by the time it reaches the downstream nation. (Note: this has happened in history more than once.) The downstream nation faces drought, starvation, desertification and even millions dying of thirst. If a compromise between the two nations cannot be reached, and reached quickly, the downstream nation can morally justify acting as aggressor specifically in the act of destroying the dam, even if the act is likely to start a war and even if the act is likely to kill a few people who might be operating the dam at the time.

Copyright 2020, Wired Ivy, LLC

Answerbag | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy