Panel Three - Reciprocity: Worth Killing vs. Worth Dying For
Loading...
Authors
Advisors
Second Readers
Subjects
Date of Issue
2012-01-26
Date
January 26, 2012
Publisher
Monterey, CA; Naval Postgraduate School
Language
Abstract
Type
Presentation
Description
The reciprocity of risk in armed conflict is rooted in the ancient tradition of chivalry and knightly combat. But when one side of conflict employs technology the other cannot, how might this affect the moral and ethical choices of the disadvantaged side? Or, to employ more inflammatory rhetoric, what does it mean politically and culturally when, as Washington Post editorialist George Will has asked, "something worth killing for is not worth dying for”? This topic receives substantial, if not substantive, attention in media and will be the focus of the panel. The question: Might gross disparities between combatant capabilities affect parties’ decisions regarding jus in bello and if so, what effect may this have upon policy?
Series/Report No
Department
Identifiers
NPS Report Number
Sponsors
U.S. Pentagon; Office of Naval Research
Funding
Format
Citation
Distribution Statement
Rights
This publication is a work of the U.S. Government as defined in Title 17, United States Code, Section 101. Copyright protection is not available for this work in the United States.