Sep 9, 2006 12:20:00 PM cite

Abbas Beydoun: Holy war does not need to be justice, because it gets its legality from laws, people or from God and religion. Justice war has to depend on human law, United Nation and justice, however, we still do not exactly understand what justice war means and I think it is difficult that such a war exists. Even the defensive war can be changed into barbaric and aggressive war. As long as war used violence, it will not be easy to control. The humanitarian intervention is an important issue and that what happened in my country "Lebanon" where the United Nation intervention was really very necessary, because my country suffers from weakness and there is power which is stronger than the government itself. We can notice this phenomenon in the 3rd world where it is easy for a company, a family or a tribe to be stronger than the whole society, so in this case the humanitarian intervention would be justice.

by Abbas Beydoun

Sep 9, 2006 12:20:00 PM cite

Alvaro Restrepo: Just war. I don’t know if we are talking about just war or only war. I think that their is neither holy nor just war. The only holy thing that exists for me is life itself. War is an aspect of human nature that has to do with insanity, with the capacity of the human beings to enter into some cycles of insanity or collective madness. It is obviously possible to talk about selfdense and humanitarian intervention in order to prevent bloody death of people in extreme situations. But for me there do not exist just or holy wars. War is always diabolic, tragical, sad and it is always synonym of disease.

by Alvaro Restrepo

Sep 9, 2006 12:20:00 PM cite

Ana Lucy Bengochea:

by Ana Lucy Bengochea

Sep 9, 2006 12:20:00 PM cite

Andries Botha: Sandra, there is no difference, they’re both wars. There is no difference. 'Holy wars' or 'just wars' or wars against terrorism, wars of liberation, it’s just war. Very often they pretext for aggression rather than defense. It is part of the vocabulary which we’ve brought with us, part of the way in which we’ve evolved as a species, that we developed the rational for the necessity, the ultimate form of institutionalized aggression. Where we agree as a collective to willfully destroy the other. We really need to redefine and rethink. War is a completely aggressive and outdated idea. There’s no necessity for it. It’s just evolved out of our inability as a civilization or as a species to negotiate our differences.

by Andries Botha

Sep 9, 2006 12:20:00 PM cite

Angaangaq Lyberth: Sandra, there is and there should not be any holy war nor just war. No such things should be amongst us and you know that. So Sandra, you will now be responsible for eliminating those within us. How can anyone take the right to create a war? Isn’t it enough that we have wars at home between mother and father and the siblings? Isn’t it enough that we have wars in our schools, in our institutions, let alone having killing machine going on around us? We cannot. There is no such things has just war nor as a holy war. The only, if there was anything, is that when the nation is endangering others then you and I we have the responsibility to eliminate that. That means the security forces have to come and remove that danger, not killing anyone but eliminating the problem by removing those people who are causing the wars to happen. It does not matter what kind of name they’re using, just or holy. It does not matter. Sandra, it has never mattered. They are the kind of war we hold, it has never been right. So let’s eliminate those wars and live in peace together. Imagine that you and me being able to travel to all corners of the world without ever fearing of anyone. What a concept of imagination. Sandra, it is possible to live that. So let’s do it.

by Angaangaq Lyberth

Sep 9, 2006 12:20:00 PM cite

Anthony Arnove: I think all of these terms have been used in ways that are problematic. The term humanitarian intervention is really perhaps the most questionable of the terms. The previous question raised questions about self-defense and made a very important point about how self-defense and terrorism are used in such hypocritical ways in contemporary discussions of politics. But the question of humanitarian intervention is one that really also needs to be a question, because humanitarian intervention has become the way increasingly that war is justified, that war is defended. But, it has historical roots. The reality is that wars are rarely fought for their stated reasons or almost never fought for the stated reasons, and the politicians have always dressed up their justifications for war in terms of liberation, in terms of humanitarian names, in terms of freeing people from tyranny and oppression and advancing human rights. But, there is a new discourse of human rights, which is justifying imperialism today. And in the context of the past two decades, we’ve seen an expansion of a discourse that seeks to justify war on the basis of human rights. And the highest examples of that really came under the administration of Bill Clinton, a liberal, who saw a means of re-legitimizing the role of the United States as a global superpower in the context of the collapse of the cold war framework. George Bush laid the groundwork for the expansion of US power, the role of the United States as an imperial power, with the collapse of the justification of combating Soviet imperialism, which was the justification used for the interventions in the Cold War era for the most part, although even those of course were described in humanitarian terms. But then, ultimately, it was Clinton who used the doctrine of humanitarian intervention and gave a legacy, which then Bush could exploit.

by Anthony Arnove

Sep 9, 2006 12:20:00 PM cite

Anuradha Koirala: There is no question of holy war and just war. There should be no war. [inaudible] self defense or humanitarian intervention. There should be no war; no holy war, no just war.

by Anuradha Koirala

Sep 9, 2006 12:20:00 PM cite

Anuradha Mittal: First of all, we have to question the war itself. If we talk about self-defense, we actually have to redefine our security. If we look at the latest -- since 9/11, the things that have happened around the world, we know that there has been nothing done to actually promote security. The actions of Bush administration have made each one of us in this world more insecure. So, there is no such thing as a holy war or a just war. What we do know is that countries are just at war, and it is as simple as that. War which is about violence, which is about aggression, which is about taking lives of people, which is about colonizing, which is about stealing resources of other countries, there is nothing holy about it, there is nothing just about it, and so this whole myth about self-defense or about humanitarian intervention. Humanitarian intervention would require not actually going to war. It would require a congress, would require our parliaments to basically intervene as should have happened in the case of Lebanon. Governments around the world should have rallied, immediately asked for a ceasefire, but no in the name of self-defense a month was allowed to go by, more than thousand people were allowed to be killed while millions of people were displaced in the name of self-defense. There is no defense when you make ourselves vulnerable. We make ourselves more insecure and that’s what needs to happen.

by Anuradha Mittal

Sep 9, 2006 12:20:00 PM cite

Ashok Gangadean: For me this question, again is raising the question of language and discourse. And as these terms of “self-defense,” “humanitarian intervention,” are being redefined in a globalized society where we no longer are able to and should continue to see and use language from the privilege of our own lands and our own value system. But opening up to a global space in which we can begin to see from the point of view, the other, as well. With all of these terms up for redefinition and reconstitution in this expanded global space, and leaving the egocentric space behind, where we privilege our own language and our words, and often demonize the language of the other and the status of other, so that whether someone -- the term “holy war,” of course, is a term in our current cultural setting that has all kinds of highly charged connotations. Or a “just war” is a “holy war,” carrying on a war for the cause of “God." A “truly just war,” those are highly charged words and so, all of that is up reexamination. I was speaking from an egocentric lens of where we are prejudice from our own vocabulary as inherently right and the other is inherently wrong.Or are we moving into a space in which we are more dialogic and mutual and equality between the self and the other, we have to see the transformation of our language. So, what one might call “self defense” or “terrorist,” or one might call “appropriate human intervention,” these are highly-charged value concepts. Words that are charged with values. So, I think that that’s really what we have to look at and that’s what this question is rightly asking. And so I think that the question of a “just war,” understood in a global context, if there is such a thing as a “just war,” it is a war that is intervening humanitarian intervention to stop deeply injust violation of people for the true cause of the sanctity of life.

by Ashok Gangadean

Sep 9, 2006 12:20:00 PM cite

Audrey Kitagawa: I think the more fundamental question that we need to look at is should there be even a difference between a holy war and just war that we should be concerned about as opposed to war itself. And the more basic question of is war ever just, is war ever holy and to see how our commitment to war, the necessity of war which is based in a consciousness of fear helps us again to language and use language in ways that justify our behaviors as correct and proper as -- and behaviors of others as incorrect and improper. But the more fundamental thing that we need to look at is whether or not war itself is ever a just, proper way to resolve differences. And to work through challenges and disagreements that we may have. And I think we need to make more of a commitment to understand and see the ways that we can work together cooperatively, join hands, and to divest ourselves of our investment in the machineries and mechanisms of war and put our energies behind learning, studying, and utilizing the ways of peace.

by Audrey Kitagawa

Sep 9, 2006 12:20:00 PM cite

Benjamin Fahrer: Self-defense and humanitarian intervention redefined, war is being redefined as well. A holy war and a just war, a war, it's like everyone fights for different causes. For those fighting on the side of the holy war, it is coming from within; it is coming from their spirit, it is the Jihad. It is the apex of a religious succession of evolution and that this is it. If you’re going to die, if the end of your life is coming, you must make it just, it must be holy, it must be sacred. So even a just war it can be a holy war. Who’s defining the holy war? This question is coming from Berlin, Germany, if this is coming from someone in Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq; those that are fighting for say a holy war. I suppose that those are fighting for a just war. Man, is any war just? Is any war holy? What is holy? That’s spiritual succession of life and death and if you go to die but that what which you believe is holy, for that what you believe is just. It would be better if wasn’t for war, but for that which is holy and is just. Non-violence as opposed to violence. We need to stop killing each other to see what is holy. We all have our belief story; we all have our reasons for living, and for some, war is the means of their expression. Just war? This war is just [audio ends]

by Benjamin Fahrer

Sep 9, 2006 12:20:00 PM cite

Benson Venegas:

by Benson Venegas

Sep 9, 2006 12:20:00 PM cite

Bianca Jagger: Answertext will be available soon.

by Bianca Jagger

Sep 9, 2006 12:20:00 PM cite

Bill Joy: I think we use the word war too freely. You talk about the war on terrorism which is largely a police action. When we talk about the war on drugs, when the proper response to drug problems is more about treating it as an illness. These things aren’t wars. A just war, I think there are very few just wars. A holy war, what a terrible idea. So I think we have to be careful to not use this word war so much and to realize what these things are is often not about a war, an armed conflict, it’s about other things and we’re using it just because of the strong imagery that it provides. I hope we don’t have any holy wars. And I hope we don’t go along believing that there are just wars cause there are very few.

by Bill Joy

Sep 9, 2006 12:20:00 PM cite

Bora Cosic: There is no holy war and there is no justified war! War is evil that can always be escaped if there are people good willing to solve there controversies, conflicts and problems in peaceful way. Holy war is something specially perfidy there it uses religion as a base for payoffs with those who have deferent belief of our own. Starting from Christian wars to the ethnic cleanings in Bosnia and Kosovo, its all comes down to the extermination of the people of other religion, nation or ethnic group. Justified war is also a flowerily phrase that beers justification of armed conflicts in the name (for the sake) of higher goals. But who is going to ascertain this justice in which name the war is being fought?

by Bora Cosic

Sep 9, 2006 12:20:00 PM cite

Brian J. Weller: Well, war is just that. It’s just war. War is never holy. In fact, the concept of a holy war it’s oxymoron really. But these are conflicts arising out of our deepest fears about survival and humanitarian intervention, I believe, is the only hope for the future here; intervention and prevention. These are the keys to a peaceful war and this is truly what holiness is about. Holiness comes from that same notion of wholeness. Again, when human beings are experiencing their own inner wholeness, it’s impossible for them to appreciate holiness or wholeness out in the outer world. So, basically, I would say that when people are at war within themselves based upon this lack of integration with themselves, and that’s all of us most of the time I would suggest, then unless we win the war inside of our own heads there’s no way that we’re going to make a difference out in the world. Again, as a form of last resort, you understand why war does happen and it’s in a way a collective release of stress. But my God, war is never holy.

by Brian J. Weller

Sep 9, 2006 12:20:00 PM cite

Catherine David: I'm not sure if war , self-defense, auto-defense and the case of auto-defense are redefined in such a way. There are still real cases of auto-defense but I also think that there are not only just wars which are waged. Today the holy wars are nearly the same thing as the wars Bush waged, as those are as irrational and as pseudo- religious as the wars of Al Quaida. So we have to redefine those things or to feel a little bit responsable and to consider the implications of the words but I think that the holy war...the american war is a holy war.

by Catherine David

Sep 9, 2006 12:20:00 PM cite

China Keitetsi: For example, in Africa where some presidents or in Asia where some presidents or everywhere in the Third World where presidents don't want to leave power, they create other groups. And in creating other groups because they want to stay in power. They call them terrorists. Sometimes it's a bit difficult to tell the just war and the holy war. But also, I think that we should look very close to those small groups to learn why they are fighting before we call them terrorism, before we call it holy war. We should be very sure and on truth and fairness and instead of again using the same method that they are using, we should begin to find another tactic ways, because you can't take out fire with fire. I think at the moment we are wasting so much resources on unnecessary and unwanted things than focusing on how to solve such a problem, because expanding and expanding and soon it will leave a lot of damage and a lot of destruction, a lot of wounds. And this just war could spread to Africa, to Asia, to everywhere and at the end it's not only based on religion or anything, but anyone who has nothing to do. And if also those people who like to control others are benefiting a lot because it's easy for them to find lonely people and gather them to their groups, fighting for nothing.

by China Keitetsi