Concluding Remarks

Abstract

The catastrophic sequence of global events inaugurating the new millennium— 9/11, the War on Terror, the Afghanistan war, the Iraq war— has significantly shaped our understanding of new wars. The triad of unconventional American wars has permanently altered the theoretical framework of contemporary warfare and introduced puzzling, often disappointing, intellectual responses. The Iraq war has been the focus of this debate, with the War on Terror contributing to its own monumental body of work. In considering philosophical responses to war, we become familiar with the range of possible approaches that have much in common with each another, such as the conviction that noncombatants ought to be spared. War critiques informed by canonical philosophy sought to clarify the vexingly complex predicament we have been faced with. This work has been largely concerned with exploring philosophical responses that arose as a result of the Iraq war, mainly from the Western and American academic traditions. I have concentrated on four key doctrines and the ways arguments dealing with these doctrines have been used by philosophers engaged in the Iraq war discourse. Other noteworthy arguments exist, though I focus on arguments that philosophers have consistently addressed since the beginning of the war.