Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
37 of 43 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Cogent, well-reasoned defence of defence!!, August 18, 2003
I may well be one of the last people who should be giving this book 5 stars. First, I'm a libertarian whose generally skeptical of military action. Second, as this book is largely about just war theory in the christian tradition, it should be noted that I am a non-beleiver. This book, though, is a rarity. It is well argued, is assertive yet cautious, and unlike so many others on both sides of the issue, does not degenerate into an empty rhetorical minefield. What the book is about is using just war theory, a system in christian ethical philosophy that aims at deciphering moral from immoral war, and applying this theory to the war on terror. The question: Why do we fight? The answer: Because if we didn't, either we or many innocents in the middle-east would experience far worse brutality than we would by intervening now. Again, while I'm skeptical of military intervention unless for the most extraordinary reasons, this book has gone far in forcing me to reconsider why we are doing what we are doing. Contrary to much propoganda, we are in fact conducting ourselves fairly, judiciously, and cautiously. In fact, one of the most noticable things she does is to contrast the way radical islam (and she carefully contrasts this with Islam) conducts itself with the way we conduct ourselves. It is night and day. Terrorism kills indiscriminately: if you are western, you die. We are judicious and discriminate if we must kill: We kill terrorists and do everything possible to ensure that civilians live. Radical islam does not 'talk it over' before killing. We do - even if the left feels stifled when voicing opinion, they may still do so and sometimes to great effect. We use force via an organized army and recognize international statutes of war ethics. Radical islam does not. The differences go on and on. While I remain unconvinced of the Iraq war (which this book does not address as it was written previous to it) Mrs. Elshtain's arguments on the moral reasons for us to engage in the war on terror are thoughtful, intellegent (not hot-air rhetoric like, say, Sean Hannity) and extremely insightful. It has forced me to re-examine my (former?) positioin and it may do the same for you.
|
|
|
14 of 15 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Justice is the only valid weapon, January 16, 2004
In 1998 Osama bin Laden declared war against America, denouncing US occupation of the lands of Islam in the Arabian Peninsular and the Muslim obligation to kill and plunder pagans. In the west we find it difficult to accept such language at face value but bin Laden and his followers mean it when they call westerners 'infidels'. Bin Laden and his followers also mean it when they talk of an obligation to kill as a recruitment video shown in a Finsbury, North London mosque shows disarmed enemies being decapitated with the commentary "You have to kill in the name of Allah until you are killed. Then you will win your place in paradise. The whole Islamic world should rise up to fight all the sick unbelievers. The flag of Jihad will be forever held high. Our enemies are fighting in the name of Satan. You are fighting in the name of God." Radical Islamists want to impose their official religion, through terror if necessary. The message that Jean Bethke Elshtain wants us to understand is that in bin Laden and his followers we face a new kind of enemy; that those who live in freedom must sometimes fight for the right to live in freedom; that with America's great power comes even greater responsibility; that we must fight - not to conquer - but to defend who and what we are. The Pope's response to September 11 may be summed up in these words: "When terrorist organizations use their own followers as weapons to be launched against defenseless and unsuspecting people, they show clearly the death wish that feeds them. Terrorism springs from hatred, and it generates isolation, mistrust and closure ... Terrorism is built on contempt for human life. For this reason, not only does it commit intolerable crimes, but because it resorts to terror as a political and military means it is itself a true crime against humanity." Martyrs die for a religious belief or cause and to claim that a martyr can be a suicide bomber or mass murderer is a corruption of the word. Terrorists are those who kill people they consider their enemy; terrorists sow terror; terror subjects its would be victims to paralyzing fear; terrorists are not interested in the subtleties of diplomacy or in compromise solutions. Terrorism is extremist and Islamist fundamentalism is extreme. The Western politics of negotiation and compromise do not work with terrorism. President Bush distinguished carefully between Islam as a great religion and terrorists who are in effect trying to highjack Islam itself. Islam is as fractured as Christianity and there seems to be no spokesman who speaks in the name of Islam. Who governs in the name of Islam? We hear continually the voice of the Islam extremists but seldom hear the voice of those who truly represent Islam. How do you respond to those who have declared you a mortal enemy because you hold radically different views on constitutional rights, moral equality, separation of church and state, and equality of sexes? There is a great deal at stake in the current struggle, and there are values worth defending. But how we choose to defend these values is all-important, for in fighting terror that knows no limits, there are limits we ourselves must observe. That is what this book is all about - seeking the correct response to our terrorist enemy. The overwhelming reaction to September 11 was to speak of justice and that is what the author proposes - justice as represented by a blindfolded figure holding balanced scales. Elshtain draws on Augustine to define the principles, but refers to Paul Tillich and Reinhold Niebuhr, who confronted political evil in the World War II era, to define the practice of confronting the enemy. Tillich broadcast 112 addresses into occupied Europe to help German Christians understand what the Third Reich was doing, saying that Germans had to stand against the terror and confront the Jewish question; he was clear that terror had to be fought but without hatred. Niebuhr maintained that the world must be engaged; Christians must understand that their own freedom is entangled with political realities. One cannot withdraw from responsibility by refusing to confront the inevitable moral ambiguities of politics. In his essays "Love your Enemies" and "To Prevent the Triumph of an Intolerable Tyranny" Niebuhr makes the case for struggling against a determined foe intent on our harm and destruction without hating that foe. If you would like to learn what bin Laden and his followers are trying to do to the West and if you suspect that justice is the only valid weapon we can use to combat terrorism this is an excellent book to study.
|
|
|
20 of 23 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Why we must fight, June 29, 2004
This volume very nicely brings together four broad themes into one focused discussion. The nature of radical Islam, the threat of terrorism, the doctrine of just war, and the place of American power in a turbulent world are the major issues treated. University of Chicago professor of social and political ethics Jean Bethke Elsthain is well suited to this task.She deftly merges the various streams of philosophy, theology, ethics, politics and international relations into a coherent account of how the US in particular and the West in general should proceed after September 11. She reminds us that appeasing terrorism is not the answer, yet we need to deal with the threat of militant Islam in a way that does not violate our own ethical codes and political ideals. As such, this book has a bearing on recent events which were unknown at the time of writing, notably the Iraqi prisoner abuse scandals. How can democratic nations defend both their values and their borders against an enemy that does not play by the rules, and is happy to use the freedoms associated with democracy in its attempts to destroy it? How can we uphold ethical standards and at the same time weed out those committed to undermining our way of life? How can democratic nations respond to terror without resorting to terror? Indeed, can moral distinctions be made in this regard? Is all killing and the use of force evil, or is it sometimes justified? Should we accept the argument of moral equivalence which states that American use of force is just as bad as Muslim terrorism? And, as some assert, did America bring September 11 upon itself? These and other questions are expertly addressed in this incisive work. An overriding theme of the volume is that America has a moral and civil obligation to withstand those who seek to destroy it. American has the right to defend freedom and the ideals and values that make America a beacon for many around the world. Indeed, the author is also one of sixty signatories of "What We're Fighting For," which is included as an appendix to this book. This document explores some of these core values and the right of a democratic nation to celebrate those values as well as defend them, when necessary. Segments of this volume examine the political realism of Tillich and Niebuhr, and lay out the doctrine of just war as elaborated by Augustine, Aquinas and others. Augustine said that tranquillitas ordinis, or ordinary civic peace, was the primary responsibility which a government must provide. Without secure civic order, none of the basic human goods that people aspire to can flourish. Thus a just government will protect its people from internal anarchy and outward threats. And one of the greatest outward threats that Western nations face today comes from terrorists and fanatics, often associated with Islamic extremism. What happened on September 11 2001 was not the first of such assaults, but it was the most glaring and horrific. September 11 put the world on notice that there is a clash of civilisations underway, as Samuel Huntington has phrased it. Those nations that value human dignity, religious freedom, and democratic polity are pitted against those who hate such values and want them eliminated altogether. The Osama bin Ladens of the world do not just want Western nations to withdraw to a small part of the globe, but they want them exterminated. We need to take the words of these fanatics at face value. When they say they hate what we represent and want to see us overrun by the rule of a theocratic Islam, they mean it. They have openly proclaimed that they are involved in holy war, and that their cause is right. As such, free nations have a moral and civil obligation to withstand these terrorists and prevent them from implementing their agenda. It is neither Christian nor responsible to appease such opponents, nor seek to pretend that such threats do not exist. Loving your neighbour includes protecting them from harm and maintaining their dignity as human beings. Terrorists do not respect the democratic ideals nor the Christian virtues. Therefore a just war against terrorism is in order, and one does not have to have grave moral misgivings about it. To withstand the enemies of freedom and democracy is both a right and an obligation. The author is to be commended for reminding us of these truths, because too many Western apologists for terrorism and radical Islam are at work seeking to convince us otherwise. At a time of ethical uncertainty, the need for moral clarity is all the more urgent, and this book is a clarion call to remind ourselves of what it is that we value and why. It deserves a wide and considered reading.
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
by Michael Ignatieff
by Jean Elshtain
by Jonathan Lear
by Seneca
See all 54 books this book cites
