h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Take the extreme positions a) that war is never justified, and b) that war is always justified and see where it gets you.

If you believe that war is never justified, then you are making the assumption that the "adversary" is a rational person, or is willing to behave rationally, which may not be the case, and there are ample examples of completely irrational behaviour by power hungry despots across the globe whose only answer to those who oppose them is to drive them and their supporters into the ground.

If you believed that war was always justified, then you are making the assumption that it is futile to discuss anything rationally with an opponent in order to come to a solution. "Forget about any compromise or discussion, lets bomb the hell out of them" sort of idea.

So maybe it comes down to how rational the opponent is, and perhaps how the opponent is viewed by independent observers (if such people exist).

Is the killing of innocent civilians justified? Well, based on the logic above it probably is but I still get sick to my stomach everytime I hear of innocent people being killed in a greater war. From the point of view of the families affected it could never be justified, and I can see their point of view.

Woodpigeon

Well -argued, Woodpigeon. I wonder if the big question from "The Brothers Karamazov" fits in here:
"Imagine that you are creating a fabric of human destiny with the object of making men happy in the end, giving them peace and rest at last, but that it was essential and inevitable to torture to death only one tiny creature...and to found that edifice on its unavenged tears, would you consent to be the architect on those conditions?"
Elfie