Laws of war

Franz Lieber and the Lieber Code In the midst of the deadliest war in American History, there stood a voice of morality and reason on the United States soil. Franz Lieber, a German political philosopher, created a series of political works in which he explained the importance of defining ethical boundaries for soldiers in times of war. In 1863, President Lincoln commissioned Lieber to create a series of laws to reflect his ideas (“Francis Lieber,” 2013). Lieber went on to create what became known

The first section contains six preliminary articles that propose conditions under which states can bring an end to war. Here, Kant calls for treaties to be made in good faith without hope on the part of the contractual parties to resort to war in the future. He asserts his belief in the sovereignty of states and calls for the abolishment of armies and accumulation of wealth by states. Kant argues that “The accumulation of treasure

comes to terrorist attacks. Depending on the country’s view point on terrorist acts, the terrorist may be dealt with in a few different manors. These terrorist may be treated as POW’S (Prisoners of war), tried as criminals, or a Hybrid. Hybrids consist of the lowest laws of POW’S and the country’s criminal laws combined.As well as should torture be implemented? Based on the recent events that have taken place in Paris, France, both Luban and Calhoun have different approaches on what to do about this situation

Civil war, both military and civilian institutions started to realize the importance of a code of ethical treatment for soldiers on the battlefield. In 1864, the Red Cross in association with the international community created the Convention for the Amelioration of the Wounded in Time of War (Shaw, 2013). This document laid out ethical guidelines for the treatment of combatants and became the basis for the Geneva Conventions as we know them today. During the tumultuous events of World War I, the

The rules of jus in bello (or justice in war) serve as guidelines for fighting well once war has begun. Some maintain that morality does not exist in warfare, and therefore object to just war theory. War is hell, the argument goes, and one is entitled to do whatever is necessary to ensure victory for one's own side. Just war theory, on the other hand, sets forth a moral framework for warfare and rejects the notion that "anything goes" during times of war. Belligerent armies are entitled to try

conditions for just war are: proper authority, a just cause, and a right intention. The first condition, proper authority, specifies that a war in order to be just must be declared by the authority of the head of a state. A declaration of war gives the opposite nation the opportunity to reconsider things and resolve the issue in a peaceful way. Only if the highest authority rejects or deny this opportunity a war is consider just. The second condition is a just cause, which means that a war must be declared

Can a nation justify a war if it results in death? Over thousands of years, many wars resulted in millions of deaths. War killed civilians for the sake of land, money, and resources, however lives have also been saved because of a country protecting the innocent. Winston Churchill once bravely told the people of England, “We shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall

Declaration for War in 1917      Welcome fellow Senators. We are here today to discuss what the United States should do following Germany’s announcement of unrestricted submarine warfare and the sinking of the three American merchant ships. A resolution is put forth in front of the senators. The first section of the resolution says that: The U.S. Government authorizes President Wilson to use the Armed Forces of the Unit6ed States to wage war against the Nation of Germany

pacifist? Or do you subscribe to just war theory? How does this impact your view of war crimes? Should there be crimes in war? I do not consider myself a realist or a pacifist. I more subscribe to just war theory. The reason why I subscribe myself to just war theory is because I believe that there are legitimate wars and illegitimate wars. In the book Crime Without Borders: An Introduction to International Criminal Justice by Aaron Fichtelberg states, “War is usually a bad thing, but under certain

conventional standards of Just War theory: these events cannot be portrayed as just under the guidelines of jus ad bellum or jus in bello. More importantly, the events should not be classified or regarded as a war. Rather, these related acts are criminal offences that were toss under the label of warfare due to the American interpretation of 9/11 as a ‘first strike’ tactic which in turn prompted a military response, setting in motion an international standard. The resulting ‘war’ has arguably been a series