[SOLVED] Major exam 3 essay questions

I’m stuck on a Philosophy question and need an explanation.

PLEASE READ: This being already your 3^rd exam, please be sure that you submit your exam to SAFE ASSIGN.FAILURE TO SUBMIT YOUR EXAM TO SAFE ASSIGN, REGARDLESS OF YOUR REASON, WILL AUTOMATICALLY TRIGGER 30 POINTS AUTOMATIC DEDUCTION IN YOUR EXAM GRADE.Also, please be mindful of what you are doing so you do not click (accidentally or otherwise) on SUBMIT before you are ready to post you file or your exam.

MAJOR EXAM #3 is an essay exam. This exam is based on chapters 9-10 of your text. Be sure that you have carefully read these chapters before you do this exam. In this exam you are to answer separately (thoroughly and thoughtfully) each question asked in each number. Be sure to answer each question in complete sentences (not fragments). Be sure to proofread your answer for clarity, coherence and correctness in grammar, spelling, punctuation mark, etc. Make sure that you label or identify each part of your answer (for example, #1A, 1B, 1C, etc.). Please do not lump together your answers. Your answer must be word-processed, double-spaced, using 10-12 font size and number the pages of exam. If you quote a passage from the reading to support your answer to a question you need to cite reference (using parenthetical citation) for that passage you are quoting from the reading.

FINAL NOTE: If you submit a file for your exam, please be sure that Blackboard can open it.Note that BB can open only a doc or dox or pdf file.I cannot read and grade a file that BB does not allow me to open.

• A. What is meant by “reprisals”?What is relevance of this concept of “reprisal” with the jus in bello rules?Discuss the details of Example #3 to show why the issue of reprisal is a controversial issue. (10 points)
• A.Explain fully and clearly the position of Michael Walzer about reprisals.In the case of Example #3, what does Walzer say about Cohen’s analysis of Example #3?Given that view of Walzer, does he have an alternative to offer in regard to the issue involved in Example #3?If so, what is that alternative method?Explain fully your answer. (15 points)
• A. Explain the absolutist argument for the jus in bello principles as it applies to the issue of military necessity.What is the position of Thomas Nagel on the issue of military necessity?For Nagel, is there a justification for intentionally setting aside the principles of jus in bello?Explain fully your answer.(15 points)

B.Explain fully and clearly the view of Sheldon Cohen about this Example #3.For Cohen, what are the two obligations that can override the duty that belligerents are not to harm prisoners of war?Explain fully the position taken by Cohen with regard to these 2 obligations.(15 points)

C. What is the position taken by Christopher (the author of our book) on the analysis of Cohen of this Example #3? (15 points)

B. Are there cases in which reprisals might legitimately be conducted?If so, under what conditions or criteria would the resort to reprisals be justified?When may a nation then invoke the doctrine of reprisals?Explain fully your answer. (15 points)

B. Explain the view of Michael Walzer regarding military necessity.For Walzer, can military necessity justify setting aside the laws of war?If so, what are the guidelines that must be taken into consideration in this regard?In your personal view, would you agree with these guidelines determined by Walzer?Explain fully your answer. (15 points)