Just War Theory

As you watch the evening news and hear broadcasts about the terrible situation in Syria, what are your reactions?  If you are like me the reports and scenes are gut-wrenching and I feel like a bystander who wants to reach out but with little to do.  Helpless and hopeless, maybe?  The least I can do is write a check to an aid organization but that feels minimalist. The massive number of refugees and displaced is overwhelming.

Now the debate about military strikes against the Assad regime.  I struggle with this.  Though I feel that most of the wars the US has waged for the last several decades were not justified, (i.e. Vietnam and Iraq) there are moral and ethical arguments here because of the use of nerve gas on the civilian population.  Not being a theologian but wanting to understand the issue from my stance as a Christian, I looked up some articles on the internet about the Just War theory.  I got bogged down in the various arguments and treatises of the theologians.. so I didn't read very far into this...   But here is a synopsis from one website

Not that my opinion on this will have any weight, except the call I can make to my senators, this review does help a bit for personal clarification.  In this case I tend to lean toward the President's position - surprising to me as one who almost always opposes the US tendency to over react and use military power. 

Each one of the bullet points below could be used to debate this issue. See where you come out on this.. 

"Just war" is the name of a tradition that believes that war is permissible but only if it satisfies a set of moral or legal rules. Though in origin a Christian doctrine, Francisco de Vitoria based his arguments on reason and so put the tradition on a more universal basis.[1] The rules applied may be ethical, religious, or formal (such as international law). The rules classically cover the justification for the war (Jus ad Bellum) and the conduct of the participants in the war (Jus in Bello).
Just war theory has ancient roots. Cicero discussed this idea and its applications. Augustine of Hippo and Thomas Aquinas later codified a set of rules for a just war, which today still encompass the points commonly debated, with some modifications.
In modern language, these rules hold that to be just, a war must meet the following criteria before the use of force:
(Jus ad Bellum)

• War can only be waged for a just cause, such as self-defense against an armed attack.
• War can only be waged under legitimate authority. Usually the constitution and the laws of a nation state specify the institutions and personnel authorized to make war decisions. The U.N Charter authorizes the Security Council to make the international community's war decisions. Citizens at their own will cannot attack another country without the permission of the legitimate authority. Conversely, in a democratic nation state, statesmen with legitimate authority will need to convince citizens that their course of action is legal and proper.
• War can only be waged with the right intention. Correcting a suffered wrong is considered a right intention, while material gain is not. Thus a war that would normally be just for all other reasons would be made unjust by a bad intention. Right intention requires that democratic statesmen accept the decision of their nations' courts and electorates on the legitimacy and the justice of their action.
• War can only be waged with a reasonable chance of success. It is considered unjust to meaninglessly waste human life and economic resources if defeat is unavoidable.
• War must be waged with proportionality in mind. The suffering which existed pre-War should not be overshadowed by the suffering the War may cause.[2]
• War can only be waged as a last resort. War is not just until all realistic options which were likely to right the wrong have been pursued