Why War

by

This argument is lost on moral relativists. If you believe that some things are good sometimes and for some people, but not for others, then you have no foundation for logical debate about morality at all. Nothing is moral, as well as everything in your universe. There is no good nor evil, no happiness or sadness, no sweet or bitter. There is nothing but gray for you.
For those of us who believe in absolute good and absolute evil, and understand that they are exactly opposite of one another (what relativists mock as “black-and-white”), then you can understand what I am about to explain.

There exists in this world good things and evil things. Evil rears its ugly head in active opposition to good, as well as good to evil. Good is life. Evil is death.

When someone adopts a lifestyle of evil, of living off the backs of others, of forcing people to obey their whims or suffer death, they are evil. They threaten everyone around them, good or evil.

When these people rise to power, they use the controls of government, which is something built by the Ultimate Good for the purpose of good, to do evil. They take that which was built to protect and do harm. They take that with which was made to build, and destroy. They leave poverty where prosperity should have been, and darkness where light should have reigned.

Inevitably, this black monster of evil, now with the controls of government of one or many nations, discovers that there are in this world people who are good, and not just mildly good, or quietly good, but powerfully good. They are so good that evil cannot resist them. They are so good that their mere existence brings bitter pains of sorrow and guilt to their conscience.

Evil lashes out with the intent to destroy these good people.

Why war?

Not because good people want to fight, but because evil people do. Not because good people want to kill but because evil peope do.

Good people fight war to first, stop evil. Second, to replace it with good. And third, to prevent evil from returning.

In Iran, we are faced with bitter evil, and evil which we thought we had exterminated in World War II. Again, we see a leader who is militarizing their country in preparation for a war, a war whose only purpose would be to destroy good people. (If there is any doubt in your mind that Israel is good, you have been fed propaganda. I encourage you to seek the other side of the story and to re-evaluate your conclusion.)

First, should we stop such evil? Is it a good action to cause Iran to give up its hopes of wiping Israel off the map? Of course it is. Allowing good people to live their lives in peace is a good goal. Preventing evil people from causing death and destruction is also a good goal.

Now the question is, to what lengths should we go to stop evil? Would you be willing to kill an evil person to stop that person? The answer here is obvious: Of course, as a last resort. Something in the back of our heads makes us answer a critical question before we decide that death is the path to peace. We must affirm for ourselves that there is no other way but this way, and that the person we are sending out of this world is indeed truly, irrecoverably evil.

One final question: Is it right to unintentionally kill innocent people, people who may be very good people, in our quest to kill the evil person? This is the moral dilemma. Of course it is wrong to kill innocent people. But it is so good to kill an evil person who is otherwise unstoppable. We can justify our actions through a number of give-and-takes.

Maybe, we can reason, the evil person if left unstopped would have killed the innocent person anyway. In that way, the result of either action would have been the death of the innocent. In this case, we can logically reason that either death (unintentionally killing versus the evil one intentionally killing) is roughly equal, so the good of having the evil person dead means killing is ok.

Maybe, we can reason, the evil person is to blame for the death of the innocent. If an evil person hides in the house of innocent people, or if they disguise themselves so that we can’t tell who is evil or not, then they are the reason why we ended up killing the innocents.

Maybe, we can reason, their deaths are not as important as the deaths of the evil ones.  In this case, we have to come to the conclusion that having both dead is better than having both alive.

It is a difficult choice to make when you are weighing the scales with human lives. We know that life is more valuable than the entirety of material riches. However, it is an important one that must be weighed. We will certainly be held accountable for our choices in the eternities. God gave us a brain and reason so that we could weigh these difficult decisions. He will certainly ask us for a reckoning of why we did what we did.

In my mind, most of the innocent casualties of war are justified with the second option. If the evil person had simply decided that war was not worth their pursuit of madness, the war would not have occurred and so many innocents would not have been killed in the waging of it. They had the choice, and they chose death. But I believe the other two offer additional consolation, but their immeasurability makes it vague.

I am no fan of war. I am not like Patton, eagerly hoping for more wars to fight because I love fighting wars. I do have a boyish curiosity of real war, but my mind has convinced me that it is an absolutely terrifying and horrific thing that I should thank God I do not have to participate in.

However, I am no Chamberlain. Peace at any price becomes no peace at all when you are willing to let evil people dictate the terms.

When a society is pressed into war, war must be fought, and it must be fought with the same spirit that WWI and WWII was fought–as a war to end all wars because after this there would be no enemy who dared to fight one again. If we are going to fight a war, and that means we have decided the cost in innocent lives is worth it, then we must fight to finality, to victory, to grind our enemies into a powder that can never be reconstituted again. That is why I had a party when Zarqawi was killed. He ain’t coming back.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: