This paper sketches an argument for the immunity of noncombatants in war. It established that in warfare there is a morally relevant distinction between noncombatants and combatants which prohibits the intentional killing of the former at the same time as it justifies the intentional killing of the latter. The author also shows that even if certain considerations undercut drawing the line of immunity between combatants and noncombatants, a weaker version of the immunity thesis is still viable.
