Just War-- or a Just War

What about America's world standing if we don't go to war after such a great deployment of military forces in the region? is a question posed in the article Just War--or a Just War? by Jimmy Carter. In my opinion whether we go to war or not at the point this was discussed wouldn't change America's world standing. In fact it would be stupid if we went to war just because we had deployed the troops. So I don't think that other countries would look down on us just because we didn't go to war but may in fact look at us with respect for not fighting unnecessarily. So I don't think that America's world standing would change if we don't go to war after such a great deployment of military forces in the region, but if it did at all only for the better.

A Just War

The prereading question that is asked is "does the War on Terror meet St. Thomas Aquinas' criteria for a just war?" Obviously it does not if you use his exact definition of a just war which includes the idea that the violence of the war must be proportional to the injury suffered to precipitate the war. Many more people have been killed during this war than in the attacks on September 11th. However is this determined by numbers alone? If 100 people die as a result of a terror attack and war is the last resort, but the war stop once 100 people are killed? Kind of unrealistic if you ask me.

Keep America Rolling

I thought that Wagoner had two purposes during his address. One was obviously to lift people up after 9/11. He did a very good job, I think, He showed people that the most important thing was to "keep America Rolling". If we give up and do not press forward, then we give the terrorists the upper hand by allowing them to cause more damage than was already done. This was very important for everyone to hear so soon after the tragedy.

Another purpose was to put in a plug for GM. I found this incredibly annoying. He kept comparing America to GM and how the entire country should follow GM's example. I think this is ridiculous. A country is very different from a car company. Granted he was was comparing it to something that everyone in the room knew and could understand, I still found this a little shallow. I think he had more on his mind than comforting people.

Wow...I dont know!!!!

When reading these three essays i found it hard to draw a connection at first. However, after thinking about them for a little bit of time I found that the only essay that expressed the "promise of america" as we know it was the very first essay, which i agree with the others was more of a promotional speech for GM than an inspirering speech. In this speech he talks about some of the values of American's that has placed the country ahead of all others.

In former president Jimmy Carter's essay he writes about how America's reasons for going to war do not make it a just war. His final sentence, "will enhance our status as a champion of peace and war." makes me think of how America percieves itself as a nation. We do indeed as Wagoner states think of our country as number one, and as Carter states the champion of all nations.

However, the last essay goes into something that we as Americans should be ashamed of. The torture of captured peoples by american soilders. Clearly this and the fact that we engaged in a war that is unjust is a reminder that America or Americans are not as great has it or we percieve ourselves to be.

Heavy terrors with a chance of manipulation

Reading Wagoner's speech put me in the wayback machine. I didn't go too far, just five or six years. Reflecting on the then and the now really forced me to speculate about the culture at the time. I mean, we were all around on the fateful day, but I don't think we were mature or integrated into the "real world" enough to recall the political climate of the time. Wagoner seems to have chosen his words carefully...very carefully. However, his diction gives key to the discrepancy between his intent and his thought process. For example, he claims his employees, as all Americans, are "grieving, they're angry, they're nervous, and they're distracted." Even though he couldn't have possibly talked to all his employees, it seems fair enough to say, given the circumstances. However, he asserts, "...they're looking for leadership more than ever." As head of the company, Wagoner is obviously the go-to guy for his employees if they're looking for leadership. How do we know he isn't just looking to assert his power further, using tragedy as an opportunity for personal gain? This whole "Keep America Rolling" campaign was built around the need to ignore the shakeup in America. However, it seems a little Big Brotherish to me that an authority figure is telling me to buy stuff for the sake of the state. Whether or not Wagoner, specifically, took advantage of the situation is irrelevant. What is relevant is the culture of fear 9/11 created, the power with which people unified, and the ease with which that power and fear was channeled into aggression. Methinks the rhetoric of those in charge knew how to transform the cloud of fear into a fog of war.