Gregg Erik PHIL322X Reaction Paper
After reading Kavka's essay about just war theory in view of the Gulf conflict, I tend to agree with his arguments. I believe that, for the most part, Right Intention was used in the reasoning behind the war, yet there were some ulterior motives for the conflict. The conflict was initiated due to the invasion of Kuwait, which demonstrated the power that we had instilled in Saddam Hussein. As Kavka explains, President Bush characterized Hussein as another Hitler, which prompted him to end the invasion as quickly as possible as to avoid the casualties of World War II. Yet, he also explains that there might have been a peaceful agreement involving Russia that could have removed the Iraqi forces from Kuwait without endangering US soldiers, Iraqi troops, nor civilians. This would have prevented the conflict, yet it would have been a temporary solution Saddam would still be in power, and the Iraqi military still would be intact and complete. Rather than introducing this temporary patch, President Bush authorized the air attacks on the Iraqi military. All in all, I respect his decision, and I think it was probably a good one in retrospect. One might argue that Bush's intentions were oil-funded, and I would have to agree to an extent since it is a very valuable resource. Yet, I would have to argue that the endangering of the world's oil prices was not the main reason for the war, but rather the reparations of a problem that we created (the Iraqi military). As the rul...