UNIT FOUR| DEFENSE & SECURITY IN A POST SEPTEMBER 11th WORLD

OPENING QUESTION…9.11.01 How do you think the terrorist attacks of September 11 change our view of defense and security?

Why A MILITARY? The Constitution’s preamble tells readers that a major goal of the document is to “provide for the common defence.”

IMPORTANT QUESTION #1 MONIES Should the United States reduce its defense spending?

“A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.” — Martin Luther King, Jr. “If we desire to avoid insult, we must be able to repel it; if we desire to secure peace, one of the most powerful instruments of our rising prosperity, it must be known that we are at all times ready for war.” —George Washington

The truth about a “common defence” WHY & HOW ARE WE SPENDING? Are we playing an active role in the international community? Are we protecting American business and economic interests? Are we advancing democracy and human rights? Are we stabilizing the Middle East? Are we protecting shipping lanes around Africa? Are we aiding our allies? Are we investing in covert or conventional operations? Are we sending drones in the sky or boots on the ground?

IMPORTANT QUESTION #1 MONIES Should the United States reduce its defense spending? https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?hl=en _US&mid=1V6rr3gAhH5tLuehji4GIRDaWLlg

IMPORTANT QUESTION #2 ENEMIES  Should the United States use enhanced interrogation techniques to protect the country?

A JUST WAR Just cause: War is permissible only to confront “a real and certain danger,” such as protecting innocent life; for example, to preserve conditions necessary for decent human existence or to protect basic human rights. Competent authority: The right to use force must be joined with the common good; war must be declared by those with responsibility for public order, not by private groups or individuals. Comparative justice: No state should act on the basis that it has “absolute justice” on its side. Every party to a conflict must acknowledge the limits of its “just cause” and the consequent requirement to use only limited means in pursuit of its objectives. Right intention: War can be legitimately intended for only the reasons set forth as a just cause. Last resort: For war to be justified, all peaceful alternatives must have been exhausted. Probability of success: This is a difficult criterion to apply, but its purpose is to prevent irrational resort to force or hopeless resistance when the outcome of either will clearly be disproportionate or futile. Proportionality: The destruction to be inflicted and the costs incurred by war must be proportionate to the good expected to be achieved by taking up arms. Destruction applies in both the temporal and the spiritual senses.

A JUST WARFARE Discrimination: This criterion requires that actions within a war must never be “total war”— nuclear war—and must never target civilian populations or non-military targets. Proportionality: Destruction caused by actions in war must be proportionate to the good expected to be achieved by the actions. Destruction applies in both the temporal and the spiritual senses. Fair treatment of prisoners of war: Enemy combatants who surrender or who are captured no longer pose a threat. It is therefore wrong to torture them or otherwise mistreat them. No means malum in se (evil in itself): Combatants may not use weapons or other methods of warfare that are considered evil, such as mass rape, forcing enemy combatants to fight against their own side, or using weapons with effects that cannot be controlled.

When it comes to national security, does the ends justify the means?

HOMEWORK due October 17th Read Domestic Policy: ECONOMY Complete Reading Guide