ABSTRACT
This conclusion presents some closing thoughts on the concepts covered in the preceding chapters of this book. The book provides an explication and definition of the concept of war. It then addresses criteria usually listed for jus ad bellum, the justification for entering or continuing a war. The foremost alleged innovation “revisionists” lay claim to is thesis of the moral inequality of combatants, that is, the thesis that combatants on justified side and on the unjustified side do not have an equal liberty-right or justification to kill each other. The second alleged innovation “revisionists” like to emphasize is “reductive individualism,” which supposedly distinguishes them from allegedly “collectivist” tradition. One final reason is that by co-operatively devising moral norms and abiding by them in times of war, one builds trust that is not only useful during war but also basis to build upon for the time after war.
