[Avodah] Why is Milchemes Reshus allowed?

[kennethgmiller at juno.com]

I wrote:
: Even in a case where, Rachmana Litzlan, our countrymen are dying
: of starvation, and that could be remedied by attacking another
: country, I can't see any justification in killing those foreigners
: unless they are actually responsible for our starvation. Pikuach
: nefesh can justify stealing their food, but not killing their
: people.

R' Micha Berger questioned:
> Is this so? Even an ubar can be a rodeif.

Yes, an ubar can be a rodef. In such a case, the ubar is responsible for the situation. Granted that the ubar has no daas, and it is not an intentional threat, but nevertheless, the ubar *is* attacking the mother, and the mother (doctors, etc.) have the right and obligation to protect and defend her from that attacker.

So too, if the foreign country is <<< actually responsible for our starvation >>>, then we can defend ourselves by attacking them, even if they are not *intentionally* causing our problem, and this would be a milchemes mitzva.

Here's an example which might be very comparable to the ubar: There is a river which flows through a neighboring country, and then into ours. It supplies plenty of water for both of us. The other country decides to divert the flow so that it stays in their area. They're not doing it to hurt us, but only for their own purposes. But the lack of a water source has become (or will become) a life-threatening emergency to us, and we attack them to restore the original flow of the river.

That would seem, to me, to be a justifiable military action, and a milchemes mitzva. Am I mistaken? Is this the sort of "economic" reason which other posters would consider to be a milchemes reshus?

Akiva Miller