War vs.. Leader

A leader has the responsibility of choosing whether or not to go to war. Before he/she starts any conflicts, they must first realize and determine if it is either a personal battle or not, if so, then he/she must not bring their followers into such a situation. Unless there is a direct threat to their people, starting a war that could otherwise be solved peacefully or individually is inhumane.

                In the Iliad, Helen runs away with Paris. For 2 people, thousands of lives are risked. By taking her, Paris threatened the existence of his country. Paris sparked the destruction of peace between the two nations. A personal love or emotion must never be the cause of such havoc.

                When a country in itself is threatened, then it is right to take action to eliminate the threat. The people of the nation must be accounted for and reassured of their safety. They need to know something is being done to help them. Action against another for defense purposes, or for the removal of the threat is another valid justification.

                The U.S.’s war with Iraq began with the threat of weapons of mass destruction. This was a threat to the well being of the American Citizens. Although none were found, the U.S. Army removed a tyrant from power, a tyrant that threatened many citizens. The Army’s presence also establishes a higher stability than without. This conflict was justified with its outcomes.

                There are many reasons to start a war, just as there are many to not. A war that sends the young out to battle and maybe death, a war that causes pain, suffering, and destruction must never begin without weighing the outcomes prior. An unjustified war can break up many nations and spark unrest.