Eric Patterson contends in Just American Wars that the US is unique because of how it considers ethical and moral dilemmas when it fights. Particularly, the country’s democratic institutions force any politician who wishes to engage in a war to explain to voters, civil society, and other parts of the government why the war must be fought.
Modern authors tend to view American evangelicals as a monolithic assembly, rarely describing the varying facets of their beliefs. In his book “Swords and Plowshares: American Evangelicals on War, 1937–1973,” Timothy D. Padgett attempts to dispel this misconception.
As a journal of Christianity and American foreign policy, we wish to acknowledge the distinct contribution made by Sen. McCain to the advancement of Christian virtues in the field of American foreign affairs and American Foreign Policy.
Robert Kennedy had rejected the anti-Semitism of his father, Ambassador Joe Kennedy, and had pledged to send 50 jet fighters to Israel to help that small, embattled country survive in a sea of enemies. For that, he would pay with his life.
From my perspective the Ken Burns and Lynn Novick production of “The Vietnam War” had but one objective: to reinforce the standard anti-war narrative that the Vietnam War was unwinnable, illegal, immoral, and ineptly conducted by the allies from start to finish.
Although Burns and Novick don’t besmirch veterans as flagrantly, their misrepresentation of the war and its warriors has reopened old wounds. It’s not just Vietnam veterans’ reputations at stake; how we view this war shapes how we view ourselves as Americans.
Just war theorizing has typically left the issue of national honor untouched, although warriors and statesmen routinely emphasize the importance of vindicating the sacrifice of the fallen. Does prolonging a war in order to assuage or vindicate national honor comport with the just war tradition?