Just a quick thought on the Cicero quote. This meme omits the end of the sentence. It's from Letters to Atticus 7.14 where he is expressing concern about the wellbeing of his family and that of Atticus in the impending civil war between Julius Caesar and Pompey. I put asterisks around the omitted words. He writes: equidem ad pacem hortari non desino; quae vel iniusta utilior est quam iustissimum bellum *cum civibus* ('For my part I do not cease from encouraging [everyone] toward peace, which is more beneficial than the most unjust war *with fellow citizens*. 

I wouldn't say that Cicero isn't complex about war in general (I think we see that he can be in some of his writings), but civil war was a highly distinct type of conflict for Romans -- especially in the first century BCE -- than war against non-Romans.

Sean E.

Hello Anya,

I decided first to take on your question, “And can we who are not destined for bloody battlefields opine on the matter in the first place?”, with this answer: “Until one has experienced war, they cannot truly appreciate peace nor know the value of life.” So not really.

As for, “Is an unjust peace better than a just war?”, I must retort with the questions, “What is ‘just’ about war?”; “What constitutes ‘unjust’ if there is peace?”

Across the ages humans have waged just wars, but never raged for an unjust peace that is by its nature doomed to failure.

Just what dropped out of my brain.

All the best.

Darrell P. B.

First off, I haven't experienced war, so I am ignorant of the realities involved. However, I will say that we can no longer measure or judge war and its possible virtues (or legitimacy) on the basis of ancient wisdom; it may well be that there is no longer wisdom deep enough. The reason is that the means of destruction at our disposal—which were at least partly the consequence of the last great war (nuclear weapons, computers, cybernetics, etc.)—far exceed our capacity to control them and understand their consequences. The future will only be worse because we are constantly creating new and more powerful ways of dispatching each other. Only since 1945 has war threatened all life (or at least its intelligent form) on this planet. This is a completely new situation and it's clear that we have not, and perhaps cannot, come to terms with such a profound existential dilemma; I'm afraid we'll go on fighting to the end.

Timo K.

Anya,

I would quote Thomas Jefferson who said, "We are friends of liberty everywhere, but defenders only of our own."

I would stand firmly on the grounds that defending ourselves (whoever ourselves may be) from invading forces is just and proper, and at times necessary. But we should also strive to avoid conflicts, to not provoke our neighbors, and to show ourselves as strong and capable of resisting aggression.

It is not easy to determine who is principally at fault in most wars, even though both sides paint their opponents as totally to blame, but generally, there is sufficient blame on both sides, and a lack of sincere and honest efforts to avoid the conflict. I will also note that the event that causes war to break out is generally only the last in a long series of aggravations on both sides, making it easy for both sides to paint the other as at fault.

Gordon F.

Cuenca, Ecuador

Anya, first of all, thanks for your great work with Classical Wisdom! Now about war -- I have a background in Christian churches with pacifist teachings (Mennonites, Brethren and Quakers have been known as the Historic Peace Churches) and continue to believe taking another person's life under any circumstances is wrong, And folks always ask,  "What about Hitler, what about Putin? They were/are aggressors and threaten our security." (I am in the U.S.)

Good question, but do we really know their long range intentions? Will the proposed aid package to Ukraine really make us more secure? I am more concerned about our nuclear weapons stockpile. How about splitting the military budget and giving no less than 50% to peacemaking communications and efforts?

Frankly, I don't believe that will ever happen. As I read Islam Issa's new book, Alexandria, I am floored by the thousands, the millions, that lost their lives in the numerous regime changes over the centuries. We humans are wired to war. It is in our very being. Self preservation and eliminating the OTHER is our way. How do we change the DNA? And so Heraclitus, what are we gonna do about it? I stand for an unjust peace that might mean I live in a failed democracy. To even speak of these things from my bubble of Appalachia protected from the dark clouds of Gaza and Russo-Ukraine seems so pathetic. 

Yada, yada.....Roger

No war is ever just but it may be necessary in defense of family, friends, community and nation. When the foe comes to kill and destroy you the resulting struggle may or may not be quote or unquote just, but it is necessary at the very least. A peace is unjust if it contributes to or results in war later. 

Just wars lose their status if the peace imposed at their conclusion is not. The Treaty of Versailles is a case in point. Unjust peaces always lead to war. The war that results will often be just for the aggrieved party and not for the victorious party. You might say an unjust peace assures a subsequent war necessary for one side and unjust to the other.

Charles F.

Why? Why, with all that Humans have achieved since we dragged our knuckles across the Savannahs, have we not found a better way to move forward as “brothers & sisters” in our journey than to find reasons to kill each other in some misbegotten notion that someone is better than the other? If we could identify the chromosome(s) that relentlessly drive us to repeat this destructive and heartbreaking stupidity, we might break this cycle. Godspeed to those that might deliver this.

Brien C. 

War as a means for survival of a species or subspecies is probably a rule of nature. The natural law of survival of the fittest mostly depends on a species having natural predators. This helps to wean the weakest from the herd and to pare its population. As humankind is at the top of its food chain, war becomes an alternative. Hence this thought justifies Cicero’s belief.

David C. 

Can that which is unjust be just? Can that which is just be unjust? Can that which is morally right and fair be morally wrong and unfair? Ethics: "There is nothing good or bad, but thinking makes it so". Life: Whoever has the biggest stick makes it so! War makes peace, peace makes war. Why? Man is always in the middle.

Rich

War is an evil for those subjected to it. However, it seems to be a political instrument of last resort, and it is part of our genetic makeup. Humans make war like squirrels bury nuts. It has been given a false glory in the past, which has been more recently corrected by television and videos showing what it is really like. But even with this reality check, we humans still look for a villain and want to destroy him, and so wars continue. Capitalism also allows rich and protected shareholders to benefit from the sale of arms, and they can use their ill-gotten gains to bribe politicians to support wars and make more money. I don't see an end to this. What is just or unjust is a matter of opinion. Peace is better than war for those in the line of fire, yes. But human nature drives us to war, and we invent reasons to do it.

Michael S.