The war in Afghanistan is justified

I find the just war theory; a doctrine of military ethics can help us gauge what qualifies as a justified war in most circumstances. The doctrine is of Roman philosophical and Catholic origin and has being widely used for thousands of years. Just cause is defined within the doctrine: The reason for going to war needs to be just and cannot therefore be solely for recapturing things taken or punishing people who have done wrong; innocent life must be in imminent danger and intervention must be to protect life. Force may be used only in a truly just cause and solely for that purpose—correcting a suffered wrong is considered a right intention, while material gain or maintaining economies is not. [http://en.wikipedia.org...] Do you agree that the war in Afghanistan meets the qualifications to be a just war within the Just War doctrine or do you disagree with the with the Just War Doctrine Responses: I - I would first like to point out that your first point is an inaccurate one because of changes in Pakistan's change in policy towards the Taliban has changed drastically and now the Pakistani military is now beginning to target the that have taken refuge in South Waziristan where the Taliban and Al-Qeada, meaning there is now no need for the United States to become involved militarily with Pakistan. However even before this change in policy the reason that the war threatened to spill over into Pakistan is because the Pakistani government refused to pull troops from its border with India and focus them on their border with Afghanistan [http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com...]. Regardless of this fact the Pakistani government has begun acting on the advice of American and European countries and their use of diplomacy with India. The decision to target the by the Pakistani government is also due to the fact that just like the united states Pakistan is witnessing terrorist attacks being committed against their country because of the Taliban. It would appear that the Washington and Pakistan in fact have a common enemy. II - It is true that the European countries are posed with a much greater threat then us in North America because of their vicinity to Afghanistan and other countries that support the Taliban and Al Qaeda, but the London bus attacks were in fact fueled by the then recent war in Iraq. In fact 2/3 of Britain's citizens believed that the attacks were fueled because of the invasion of Iraq and their decision to aid the United States and the bombers also cited it as their motivation as well [http://www.guardian.co.uk...][http://en.wikipedia.org...]. And in recent months Al Qaeda has jump-started its campaign efforts indicating that the Taliban and Al Qaeda are ruining out of money which they need to carry out further terrorist attacks. III - The argument that the United States has become vulnerable to future attacks because of the war in Afghanistan is an inaccurate one, in recent months Al Qaeda has released video indicating that they are jump starting fund raising because their funds are diminishing, that combined with the fact that their safe havens in South Waziristan have put the Taliban and Al Qaeda in a very unfavorable position and has drastically diminished their ability to orchestrate organized terrorist attacks against the United States and Europe.