Based off a comment in another thread, a Flutheronian said war falls in a moral vacuum, how does that work? Looking at it from a world that is just the world, morality is much a personal thing or implemented by groups of like minds. What one people or nation has for moral is not another, and certainly their outlook on what to do or not to do in war would be the same. If morality were something you could suspend in war, does one do it to have a better chance at victory? Does the mean you can kill innocent civilians to achieve victory or vanquish your enemy? Is it that one’s morality doesn’t change but said people choose to pragmatically ignore it, knowing to use their standard of morality used in their neighborhoods and city blocks would make victory hard or impossible? It is easier to compromise one’s morals by simply saying war is in a vacuum?

Topics: war, standards, morality, civility, victory