Actions that stem directly from political issues can almost always be critiqued and criticized by the general public. However, one might come to contemplate about what might such notorious philosophers, such as Machiavelli, Locke, and Hobbes, say about a political movement such as a protest against war. The minds of these great thinkers varied in distinctive ways however their thoughts conveyed or at least had similar focal points. What will be analyzed and deduced from their writings is what each philosopher would probably comment about a protest held against a war with Iraq.
             However, what must be noted are the origins of the war and the many possible reasons in which the protest is being held. This is very essential because the opinions of these philosophers will sway greatly if the motives of the war differ from what the U.S government claims. The first assumption that must be made is that the reasons for going to war would be to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction. The reason being security for themselves as well as other countries in which Iraq could possibly harm. A second assumption would be in order to gain control over oil, a natural resource, that is held in Iraq. The third and last noted reason would be to save and free the people of Iraq from the brutal force of the government that are taking away their natural human rights. One must also assume that the alternative from going to war would be peaceful negotiation. The following arguments will be made assuming that the protests are being held against the United States from going to war with Iraq for the acknowledged reasons.
             The first argument made will be assuming that the protests are against the United States going to war with Iraq in order to disarm them from weapons of mass destruction in order to protect the U.S as well as other countries. The protests are held in order to avoid death that will occur in the chance of war as well as the possibi...