On January 3, 2020, Iranian major general Qasem Soleimani was killed through a targeted drone strike at the authorisation of the US President Donald Trump. This thesis examines if, and in that case how, the arguments presented by the Trump administration used to justify the killing of general Soleimani are in line with the principles of Just War theory. By conducting a case study, through a qualitative content analysis, analysing four official statements made by the Trump administration during a two months period after the killing, this thesis will examine the moral discourses in the arguments presented. Drawing on insights from studies regarding the justification of War on Terror, preemptive war, and targeted killings according to the Just War theory, lays the foundation for a deeper reasoning of the legality of the argumentation based on the principles of Just War. This thesis will show that in some aspects, the arguments presented by the Trump administration can be interpreted to be in accordance with one of the principles, but none of the statements satisfy the criteria in all of the principles. Therefore, the overall conclusion of this analysis is that the Trump administration has the intention of justifying the attack, but the arguments used are not rooted in Just War theory. Further, this thesis will also show an inconsistency over time in the arguments presented. The contribution from this study lays in the analysis of the arguments on the basis of the principles of Just War theory, not from the perspective of international law. The intention from this thesis is not to analyse if the attack itself can be seen as just according to Just War theory but looking at the argumentation presented by the Trump administration.

Dr. Lenore Walker developed battered woman syndrome to address the issue of domestic violence and to give battered women a defense in situations in which they kill their abusive partners when they are not overtly threatening them. Self-defense law is based on male on male combat. Women are less able to protect themselves in an attack by a man, and so they may preemptively attack their sleeping partners to avoid a situation in which they cannot adequately protect themselves. Battered woman syndrome explains why these battered women act in a way that is irrational to a non-battered person. Walker's theory of learned helplessness explains why the woman does not leave the abusive relationship, and the cycle of violence theory explains why she perceives an imminent threat. Battered woman syndrome is problematic in its legal application because of problems with its scientific validity and reliability. It also furthers gender stereotypes and blurs the line between a justification and an excuse defense. While, Dr. Walker's intentions were good, battered woman syndrome is inadequate. Women's difference from men still have to be acknowledged in cases in which battered women kill their husband's, but social agency framework is a more effective way to acknowledge gender differences. This framework takes into account social circumstances that would explain a woman's actions rather than including pathology. This would explain why the woman did not leave an abusive relationship. To avoid the pathology of BWS while explaining why the woman felt an imminent threat, the defense can turn to a pattern of abuse that helps her reasonably recognize when violence is likely.