This paper sets itself upon analyzing the Iraq War of 2003 through the lens of modern Just War Theory. We will begin with a curt summary of Iraq’s history, focusing particularly on its determinedly odious leader, Saddam Hussein. Thereon, we will be analyzing a pro-war security argument, the aim of which is to assess the threat of Hussein’s weaponry ambitions and what that threat meant to the world. Next, we will be going over the tenets of Just War Theory itself, tracing its history from Rome to the modern doorstep, and applying the security argument to its dictum. Afterwards, we move into the anti-war segment and shall unpack the subject of Iraq's oil resources and whether or not the United States' actions disqualify the intervention from achieving Just War status. Then, our next section shall be addressing the same question of potential disqualification, only this time from the angle of the war’s questionable legality. Finally, we shall conclude on the ultimate query of this paper: was the U.S. decision to intervene in 2003’s Iraq compatible with the modern principles of Just War Theory?

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Brown University, 2008. / Vita. Advisor : P. Terrence Hopmann. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 303-309).

Textbooks are a significant element of the social studies curriculum and teacher pedagogical choice (Apple, 2004; Apple & Christian-Smith, 1991). Students' views of American history are dramatically affected by the textbook narratives to which they are exposed, and teachers often tilt their curricular choices based on the textbooks available to them (Luke, 2006; Schug, Western & Enochs, 1997). The history of our nation's armed conflicts is often presented, through our textbooks and our pedagogy, as a history of reluctant violence, which promotes a particular moral agenda that exerts control over our students' future beliefs and decisions. This is particularly important with regard to our textbook depictions of the U.S. Civil War, which holds a curricular status as a necessary and moral conflict. The "just war" doctrine is a philosophical framework which allows individuals to consider the ethical conditions under which war may be morally permissible, and it provides our students with an opportunity to engage in critical thinking regarding our nation's historical policies. The utility of the "just war" doctrine in American history classrooms is a topic that is largely unexplored in social science education. Therefore, using a critical analysis methodology that evaluates textbook depictions of the U.S. Civil War from a "just war" doctrinal perspective, the ensuing study will contribute to the research base in social science education by elaborating a framework from which teachers may approach the moral realities of war with their students.

The purpose of this study is to examine the utility of a just war explanation in understanding Canada’s decision to enter into the war in Afghanistan. It examines Canada’s three phases of the war under the lens of jus ad bellum. The concentration is upon jus ad bellum’s core criteria of legitimate authority, public declaration of intent, just cause, last resort, reasonable chance of success and proportionality and then applies it to the three phases. By examining Canada’s international role, paying close attention to Canada’s association with the UN, NATO and its ally status with the United State are important explanations of why Canada entered into the Afghanistan war. This analysis strives to provide a holistic comprehension by exploring the utility of an ignored body of explanation and extrapolates from this analysis the contemporary use of jus ad bellum.

The purpose of this study is to examine the utility of a just war explanation in understanding Canada’s decision to enter into the war in Afghanistan. It examines Canada’s three phases of the war under the lens of jus ad bellum. The concentration is upon jus ad bellum’s core criteria of legitimate authority, public declaration of intent, just cause, last resort, reasonable chance of success and proportionality and then applies it to the three phases. By examining Canada’s international role, paying close attention to Canada’s association with the UN, NATO and its ally status with the United State are important explanations of why Canada entered into the Afghanistan war. This analysis strives to provide a holistic comprehension by exploring the utility of an ignored body of explanation and extrapolates from this analysis the contemporary use of jus ad bellum.

Thesis (D. Min.)--Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, 2007. / Abstract. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 250-259).

Thesis (D. Min.)--Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, 2007. / Abstract. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 250-259).

Thesis (M.S.)--School of Advanced Air and Space Studies, 2008. / "June 2008." Vita. Includes bibliographical references (p. 82-84). Also available via the Internet.

Thesis (M.A.)--Naval Postgraduate School, 2004. / "September 2004." Includes bibliographical references (p. 69-73). Also available online.

Thesis (M.A.(History)--University of Pretoria, 2003. / Includes bibliographical references.