Write approximately 5-7 double spaced pages on Jeff McMahan challenges two fundamental assumptions found in Walzer’s more conventional account of Just War Theory (JWT).

Write approximately 5-7 double spaced pages on the following topic. Provide standard 1 inch margins and use an 11 or 12
point font.  Remain focused upon the
topic and use your own words.  The use of
secondary sources is discouraged.  If
used, a complete footnote is required. 
See examples below.[1]  Quotes from the textbook should be kept to a
minimum and only serve to illustrate your point.  A parenthetical reference for quotes from our
textbook/readings is acceptable.    For
example, “Peace includes concord and adds something thereto” (Aquinas, Q29,
i).  Quotes 3 lines or longer should
be single spaced and indented.

You are to provide a thoughtful and engaged
response to the topic below which demonstrates an understanding of the debate
at hand.  Within your response, you must
demonstrate your understanding of the key issues and arguments in our readings
and our class discussions of them.  Your paper MUST have a thesis and a
successful paper will provide supporting arguments that are rooted in the texts
we have read.

Jeff
McMahan challenges two fundamental assumptions found in Walzer’s more
conventional account of Just War Theory (JWT): the moral equality of combatants
and the independence of jus in bello
from jus ad bellum considerations. Explain
how these two theorists present contrasting accounts of JWT and evaluate the
respective strengths and weaknesses of their stances. (Which is a more coherent
theory? Whose basic assumptions and intuitions are more reasonable? How do they
compare at the level of practice?)