Laws of War
The term "laws of war" refers to the rules governing the actual conduct of armed conflict. This idea that there actually exists rules that govern war is a difficult concept to understand. The simple act of war in and of itself seems to be in violation of an almost universal law prohibiting one human being from killing another. But during times of war murder of the enemy is allowed, which leads one to the question, "if murder is permissible then what possible "laws of war" could there be?" The answer to this question can be found in the Charter established at the International Military Tribunals at Nuremberg and Tokyo:
Crimes against Humanity: namely, murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, and other inhumane acts committed against any civilian population, before or during the war, or persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds in execution of or in connection with any crime within the jurisdiction of the
Tribunal, whether or not in violation of the domestic law of the country where perpetrated. Leaders, organizers, instigators, and accomplices participating in the formulation or execution of a common plan or conspiracy to commit any of the foregoing crimes are responsible for all acts performed by any persons in execution of such plan.1
The above excerpt comes form the Charter of the Tribunal Article 6 section C, which makes it quite clear that in general the "laws of war" are there to protect innocent civilians before and during war.
It seems to be a fair idea to have such rules governing armed conflict in order to protect the civilians in the general location of such a conflict. But, when the conflict is over, and if war crimes have been committed, how then are criminals of war brought to justice? The International Military Tribunals held after World War II in Nuremberg on 20 November 1945 and in Tokyo on 3 May 1946 are excellent examples of how such crimes of war are dealt with. (Roberts and
Guelff 153-54) But, rather than elaborate on exact details of the Tribunals of
Nuremberg and Tokyo a more important matter must be dealt with. What happens when alleged criminals of war are unable to be apprehended and justly tried? Are they forgotten about, or are they sought after such as other criminals are in order to serve justice? What happens if these alleged violators are found residing somewhere other than where their pursuers want to bring them to justice? How does one go about legally obtaining the custody of one such suspect? Some of the answers to these questions can be found in an analysis of
The author uses different points of view to create tension in the story. The mom acts in a way that neglects the daughters interests. This makes them both feel less connected and leaves the daughter feeling hopeless. In paragraph 9, “‘It’s strange actually. I wasn’t expecting it, but then at the last minute the funding came through.’ She folded her arms across her waist. ‘I’m going to Costa Rica to finish my research.” This made the narrator/daughter angry and flustered with her mom’s actions. She has trouble remaining connected with her parent because they both want different things which leaves on character feeling betrayed. “Opportunity? For me? Or for you?” (34). Both of their actions and responses create tension in this story. Their communication lacks and this results in pressure on both
Conflict between the main characters in fictional stories can be so thick, you need a razor-sharp knife to cut it; that is definitely the case in the two literary texts I recently analyzed titled “Confetti Girl” by Diana Lopez and “Tortilla Sun” by Jennifer Cervantes. In the first text, tensions mount when a social butterfly of a teenage girl and her oblivious father lock horns over the subject of homework. In the second passage, drama runs high when a lonely child and her career-driven mother battle over the concept of spending the summer apart. Unfortunately, by the end of both excerpts, the relationships of these characters seem damaged beyond repair due to their differing points of view - the children end up locked behind their barrier-like
In the novel, My Brother Sam is Dead, by James and Christopher Collier, they teach that there are many other ways to solve conflict besides war. War is violent, disgusting, and gruesome and so many people die in war. Families separate in war because of how many people want to be in the thrill of the war and also how many innocent family members die in the midst of war. Lastly, war is worthless and it was caused by a disagreement over something little and the outcome of war is not worth the many lives, time, and money and there are other ways to solve conflict besides to fight. War causes so many negative outcomes on this world that it needs to be avoided at all costs.
Jus ad bellum is defined as “justice of war” and is recognized as the ethics leading up to war (Orend 31). Orend contends that an...
The narrator in Raymond Carver’s "Cathedral" is not a particularly sensitive man. I might describe him as self-centered, superficial, and egotistical. And while his actions certainly speak to these points, it is his misunderstanding of the people and the relationships presented to him in this story which show most clearly his tragic flaw: while Robert is physically blind, it is the narrator who cannot clearly see the world around him.
This story is about how the narrator is unable to see what life is really giving him and finds it through a blind man’s eyes, the friend of his wife. Cathedral is a touching story, in my opinion, as it reflects on what many of us, society, take for granted. It shows how important it is to give people a chance and to be able to see the true meaning of what surrounds us even if it is not important to our personal life. Throughout the short story, Carver uses several figurative language to expose the theme of the story.
Today, adults reading Charles Perrault’s Cinderella realize similarities and differences between Cinderella and a modern western woman. Adults recognize that Cinderella in Perrault’s fairy tale has undesirable qualities for a modern western woman, today. Cinderella is affectionate, goodwill, forgiving, and loyal. On the other hand, Cinderella is not independent, outspoken, confident, and strong. Cinderella has low self esteem and is incapable of solving problems. Inferiority, dependence and passiveness are characteristics that represent Cinderella do not characterize a modern western woman.
“Never think that war, no matter how necessary, nor how justified, is not a crime.” As depicted in the quote by Ernest Hemingway war is a difficult situation in which the traditional boundaries of moral ethics are tested. History is filled with unjust wars and for centuries war was not though in terms of morality. Saint Augustine, however, offered a theory detailing when war is morally permissible. The theory offers moral justifications for war as expressed in jus ad bellum (conditions for going to war) and in jus in bello (conditions within warfare).The theory places restrictions on the causes of war as well as the actions permitted throughout. Within early Christianity, the theory was used to validate crusades as morally permissible avoiding conflict with religious views. Based on the qualifications of the Just War Theory few wars have been deemed as morally acceptable, but none have notably met all the requirements. Throughout the paper I will apply Just War Theory in terms of World War II as well as other wars that depict the ideals presented by Saint Augustine.
In Raymond Carver’s story, “Cathedral,” the story tells of how a close outside relationship can threaten a marriage by provoking insecurities, aggravating communication barriers, and creating feelings of invasion of privacy. The husband in the story is given the gift of seeing the cathedral through a blind man’s eyes. Although the title suggests that the story is about a cathedral, it is really about two men who come together and share a vision and realize it is he who is blind.
The narrator also feels intimidated by his wife?s relationship with the blind man. When he is telling of her friendship with Robert h...
Carl von Clausewitz, “What is War?” On War. Edited and translated by Michael Howard and Peter Paret, 89. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1976.
war is a war engaged in by all if not most of the principle nations of the
War is a mean to achieve a political goal.it is merely the continuation of policy in a violent form. “War is not merely an act of policy, but a true political instrument....” Moreover, the intensity of war will vary with the nature of political motives. This relationship makes war a rational act rather than a primitive and instinctive action, where war uses coercion to achieve political goals instead of use it only for destruction, and it cannot be separated from each other even after the war has started, when each side is allowed to execute its requisite responsibilities while remaining flexible enough to adapt to emerging
...lthy and successful family. If a father is missing from a daughters life they are then considered deprived of a significant amount of love, self-worth, and confidence. The effects of a fathers absence has been demonstrated in the research presented as being damaging to the overall wellbeing of their daughters. It doesn’t matter if the catalyst of the father’s absence is divorce or having a child out of wedlock as a society we need to fix this problem. Before adults decide to have children they need to first prepare for a healthy marriage which includes learning the dynamics of a marriage. The logic behind this would be to decrease the amount of fathers lost to divorce. There are times, for instance death, when the loss of a father is unavoidable, but we need to begin to educate our fathers with the importance and impact they bring to their daughters lives.
To explain the necessity of war, we must explain what it means for something to be necessary. For something to be necessary it has to be “unable to be changed or avoided.” Well at least