The act of waging war against another nation has been a long-standing solution to settling international disputes, or making a statement about a countries’ standing in the world. In many cases war is waged only after using diplomatic means to stop the aggressor, or to try and comes to a peaceful means of agreement over an issue. Yet sometimes diplomacy is thrown to the side and war is the first and only solution on a nations mind. Each case is different from the next, and because of that it is nearly impossible to come to a concrete answer to whether nations are justified in going to war with others in the world, or in some situations, to war with their own people. It may be said that if a nation is going to war to further their own causes, then their actions will be unjustified, but if a nation goes to war to protect the peace of their people, and the world’s pace, then the war they participate in will be justified. In all situations though, military conflict should be avoided until it is the last possible option left, diplomacy having failed them.

    In the instance of the Cold War, the option of military aggression was chosen to be the absolute last possible resort because of the consequences it would hold for the world as a whole. If either nation had chosen to forgo the, at best, shaky diplomatic talks going on between the two nations and launch a nuclear missile attack, it would have spelt disaster for everyone on the planet. The United Nations, established after World War II, did its best to mediate between the two nations so all could come to a peaceful resolution to the Soviet/American issues, but largely faile. With the exception of passing a ’quarantine’ on Soviet ships going into Cuba, where the Soviets had placed nuclear weapons, there was little the U.N did to ease the tension between the two nations. More so than anything in this instance, it was Kennedy and Khrushchev who were responsible for ensuring that the world did not go to war once again. Kennedy in particular continued to be as diplomatic as he could be without sacrificing America’s position of power in the world to stop what was deemed to be a threat to the security of the American people, and to the world. If war ha resulted from this clash of Western and Eastern ideals, it would not have been for a lack of trying, but because both sides were unwilling to give too much to the other. In such case, war would have been justified by the Americans to protecting the safety of the world, and unjustified in the sense that it was largely American nationalism that had left them to conflict with the Soviets, and that the Soviets had not yet actually participated in an act of war against the Americans.

    World War II was a war that was both justified and unjustified in many ways. The multilateral action taken by nations of the world against the Fascist powers were to protect democracy and the freedom of the world. Fighting for these causes, it can e said that regardless of anything else the war was justified, and that without it the world could be a very different place today. It is also justified in the sense that trying to come to a peaceful, democratic solution to issues with a dictator of a highly right-wring country is nearly impossible, however much the Allies did try. In the end, Hitler was intent on going to war to further the Third Reich and spread fascism, regardless of any agreements he had to break along the way. The fascist aggression in Europe had to be stopped and the Allies took it upon themselves to make sure that it was, by whatever means they had to employ. In the opposite sense, World War II was a war that could have been easily avoided if the nations of the world had employed a little more multilateral force, instead of acting unilaterally. After World War I, the United States became isolationist, and stopped participating in European affairs. They didn’t become a member of the League of Nations, nor did they have much to do with Germany and its punishment after the Treaty of Versailles was signed. The League, designed to prevent another world war, was lacking the strength of its members to do anything useful in world matters. The only two large nation members, Britain and France could not agree most of the time, which lead to a large split. When Germany left the League of Nations, and broke the conditions of the Treaty of Versailles, re-militarizing themselves, the worlds powers let it happen without attempting to stop them, by peaceful means or otherwise. This appeasement of Germany left Hitler to take larger and more drastic steps towards becoming a formidable power in the world, resulting in World War II. The lack of diplomacy involved in the years leading up to this war, and the rushed and pointless acts that were partaken in right before its outbreak can be reason enough to say that it was not justified, and that it could have been prevented if nations had cooperated more. Regardless of the outcome of World War II, the justification or lack thereof for going to war can be argued by the actions, or lack of action taken by the rest of the world.

    Many consider the American occupation in Iraq to be an unjust war, fought for purely nationalistic reasons by the United States. Started not long after the ‘War on Terrorism’ began, the main reasoning behind the invasion of Iraq by American forces was that the dictator Sadam Hussein needed to be removed for the freedom of the Iraqis people. This also led into the ‘knowledge’ that Hussein was stockpiling chemical weapons for use against the U.S and the world. Under the belief that their security was being threatened by this dictator, the American people fully supported this war. President Bush sent out several ultimatums for Hussein to meet, and when they were not met, he declared war. Viewed as largely ceremonial, the diplomatic measures taken to prevent this conflict were from the beginning obviously not terms that a dictator would ever agree to. Most notably, however, was President Bush’s decision to forgo the U.N sanction needed to declare a UN backed war, something that made many people question how honourable the Unites State’s reasons were. In the year since the beginning of the war, Sadam Hussein has been removed from power and Iraq freed, speculation has arisen about the true intent of this war, focused largely around the large amount of oil the country has. Still though, there is a large population who believes that no matter what means it had to go through, the United States was fully justified in this war. They were promoting the security of the world by removing a notorious dictator from power and freeing the people of Iraq and giving them the chance for a better life. The American government took a chance to do what they thought was right no matter the opposition, and for this the war is justified to some, but also unjustified to other for the lack of diplomatic means employed to prevent it.

    Over the course of history, war hs been a staple in society; with at any given time at least one nation feeling its destruction first hand or the consequences. The question of whether war is justified or not has also been raging since the beginning of history, with each country, and each person taking a different stance on it. Many feel that if a nation is promoting their own self-interest, then going to war cannot be justified, but also if diplomatic means to try and prevent the war beforehand are not made use of, such as the Occupation of Iraq, where little negotiating was done, then that too means war is unjustified. At the same time, however, diplomacy cannot always be relied in on cases with dictators such as Hitler or Sadam Hussein, and therefore going to war may be the only choice a nation has to protect oppressed people and world security. The justification or lack of it for going to war can divide nations and create conflict within people as to what point nations should try and peacefully resolve their issues with other nations before there is no turning back. In the case of the Cold War, the negotiations were not of the best kind, but both the U.S and the Soviets employed diplomatic means as much as possible to come to a peaceful resolution. If they had let diplomacy fail the world could arguably be a very different place today. Going to war is never an easy choice, but it is harder to decide whether it is justified or not.