PEACEST 1A03 Study Guide - Final Guide: Cuban Missile Crisis

• School: McMaster University
• Department: Peace Studies
• Course: PEACEST 1A03
• Professor: Jorge H. Sanchez-Perez

Document Summary

I think that preemptive striking is the worst possible way of approaching conflict, especially when the ultimate goal for everyone should be peace. Firstly, i will explain why i do not agree with michael walzer and his method of distinguishing when a preemptive strike is justified and when it is not. Secondly, i will give an overview of why preemptive striking, in my opinion, is reckless and unnecessary. Finally, i will discuss the united states and north korea situation. Walzer states three conditions which constitute justification for a preemptive strike. The first is a manifest intent to injure, although walzer also claims that provocation does not amount to a significant threat. The second condition is a degree of active preparation, although to walzer, military preparedness does not satisfy this condition. Finally, a general situation in which waiting, or doing anything other than fighting, greatly magnifies the risk. In my opinion, i feel that walzer is contradicting himself.