Comments on: International law and the use of force http://www.darkcoding.net/strategy/international-law-and-the-use-of-force/ Solvitas perambulum Thu, 04 Mar 2010 03:00:36 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: BEGASHAW http://www.darkcoding.net/strategy/international-law-and-the-use-of-force/comment-page-1/#comment-18219 BEGASHAW Tue, 29 Dec 2009 17:13:20 +0000 http://gkgk/index.php/strategy/international-law-and-the-use-of-force/#comment-18219 USE OF FORCE SHOULD BE REASONABLY USE OF FORCE SHOULD BE REASONABLY

]]> By: Monique Wyatt http://www.darkcoding.net/strategy/international-law-and-the-use-of-force/comment-page-1/#comment-17078 Monique Wyatt Tue, 14 Apr 2009 10:47:57 +0000 http://gkgk/index.php/strategy/international-law-and-the-use-of-force/#comment-17078 Interesting topic! I have a question, where does one draw the line between the use of force and the act of aggression? Isreal in bombing Gaza and causing death of hundreds of Palestinean children, claimed that it was self defence and thus falling under the "use of force" which is justiable under the International law. The Gaza - Isreal, US - Iraq, if they claimed that this was self defence (US claimed pre-emptive self defence) what happened to the principle of proportionality? the force use in both cases were not proportionate. International law protects the richer states and punish the poorer states who sign and ratified most international treaties in hope of getting aids. Thank you Monique Interesting topic!

I have a question, where does one draw the line between the use of force and the act of aggression? Isreal in bombing Gaza and causing death of hundreds of Palestinean children, claimed that it was self defence and thus falling under the “use of force” which is justiable under the International law.

The Gaza – Isreal, US – Iraq, if they claimed that this was self defence (US claimed pre-emptive self defence) what happened to the principle of proportionality? the force use in both cases were not proportionate.

International law protects the richer states and punish the poorer states who sign and ratified most international treaties in hope of getting aids.

Thank you

Monique

]]> By: Toyin Olawunmi http://www.darkcoding.net/strategy/international-law-and-the-use-of-force/comment-page-1/#comment-16543 Toyin Olawunmi Tue, 16 Dec 2008 14:50:54 +0000 http://gkgk/index.php/strategy/international-law-and-the-use-of-force/#comment-16543 1. Everyday we face challenges; time and space continue to shift even faster than the committee of nation’s attempt at managing international crises. The Laws of war are not catching up with evolving trends of rebellious activities and new wave of terror. In West Africa diamonds and other mineral resources have continued to attract guns. International business is at conflict with international law on the use of force as New York, London and Brussels can not survive without Blood Diamonds or the crude oil from the Niger Delta. The use of force in international law, the conduct of hostilities during international and non-international armed conflicts, protected persons and protected objects, the law of weapons, rules of engagement, treatment of detainees, interrogation procedures, and occupation law have gone obsolete and require serious attention. 2. Kosovo and Rwanda always come to mind emotively, but these are a coin of different sides. The nearness of Kosovo to Western Europe has made it very compelling to treat. This is because of the history and lessons of WWII. In Africa South of the Sahara and other areas of Asia and Latin America, the Hague and International Criminal Court (ICC), is not the right recipe. The Democratic Republic of Congo, Nigeria and Sierra Leone are areas of perpetual foreign concern because of the business dimension. Law according to some is created merely for economy and application of law is for control. Hitler entered Czechoslovakia in the name of self-determination; the USSR invaded Afghanistan claiming to be invited in by a newly established regime; the United States used force against the Dominican Republic claiming to be acting on behalf of the Organization of American States; and the United States attacked Iraq in 2003 claiming to be enforcing a UN resolution. I will prescribe therefore that there should be other laws to sanction weapon manufacturers, and dealers in Diamonds, crude oil, Uranium etc that are tainted with blood. The alternative to this option is more diamonds in the west and more deaths in Africa. 3. Health insurance, Illegal immigration, and war on terror are areas that have drawn on the attention of the West. Within this mix is a continent so rich, so vast and so populous but without future. I was once told, “If Africa is not ready, rest of the world will not wait for her”. My take on this is that, international law also can not be applicable in such an environment. Cicero observes somewhere in his Epistles, that as there are two modes of contending, the one by argument, and the other by force, and as the former is peculiar to man, and the latter common to him with the brute creation, we must have recourse to the latter, when it is impossible to use the former. And again, what can be opposed to force, but force? Ulpian observes that Cassius says, it is lawful to repel force by force, and it is a right apparently provided by nature to repel arms with arms,with whom Ovid agrees, observing that the laws permit us to take up arms against those that bear them. Irrespective of the opinion of lawyers and human right advocate, after examining the sources of right, the first and most general question that occurs, is whether any war is just, or if it is ever lawful to make war. But this question like many others that follow, must in the first place be compared with the rights of nature. Cicero in the third book of his Bounds of Good and Evil, and in other parts of his works, proves with great erudition from the writings of the Stoics, that there are certain first principles of nature, called by the Greeks the first natural impressions, which are succeeded by other principles of obligation superior even to the first impressions themselves. He calls the care, which every animal, from the moment of its birth, feels for itself and the preservation of its condition, its abhorrence of destruction, and of every thing that threatens death, a principle of nature. Hence, he says, it happens, that if left to his own choice, every man would prefer a sound and perfect to a mutilated and deformed body. So that preserving ourselves in a natural state, and holding to every thing conformable and averting every thing repugnant to nature is the first duty. 1. Everyday we face challenges; time and space continue to shift even faster than the committee of nation’s attempt at managing international crises. The Laws of war are not catching up with evolving trends of rebellious activities and new wave of terror. In West Africa diamonds and other mineral resources have continued to attract guns. International business is at conflict with international law on the use of force as New York, London and Brussels can not survive without Blood Diamonds or the crude oil from the Niger Delta. The use of force in international law, the conduct of hostilities during international and non-international armed conflicts, protected persons and protected objects, the law of weapons, rules of engagement, treatment of detainees, interrogation procedures, and occupation law have gone obsolete and require serious attention.
2. Kosovo and Rwanda always come to mind emotively, but these are a coin of different sides. The nearness of Kosovo to Western Europe has made it very compelling to treat. This is because of the history and lessons of WWII. In Africa South of the Sahara and other areas of Asia and Latin America, the Hague and International Criminal Court (ICC), is not the right recipe. The Democratic Republic of Congo, Nigeria and Sierra Leone are areas of perpetual foreign concern because of the business dimension. Law according to some is created merely for economy and application of law is for control. Hitler entered Czechoslovakia in the name of self-determination; the USSR invaded Afghanistan claiming to be invited in by a newly established regime; the United States used force against the Dominican Republic claiming to be acting on behalf of the Organization of American States; and the United States attacked Iraq in 2003 claiming to be enforcing a UN resolution. I will prescribe therefore that there should be other laws to sanction weapon manufacturers, and dealers in Diamonds, crude oil, Uranium etc that are tainted with blood. The alternative to this option is more diamonds in the west and more deaths in Africa.
3. Health insurance, Illegal immigration, and war on terror are areas that have drawn on the attention of the West. Within this mix is a continent so rich, so vast and so populous but without future. I was once told, “If Africa is not ready, rest of the world will not wait for her”. My take on this is that, international law also can not be applicable in such an environment. Cicero observes somewhere in his Epistles, that as there are two modes of contending, the one by argument, and the other by force, and as the former is peculiar to man, and the latter common to him with the brute creation, we must have recourse to the latter, when it is impossible to use the former. And again, what can be opposed to force, but force? Ulpian observes that Cassius says, it is lawful to repel force by force, and it is a right apparently provided by nature to repel arms with arms,with whom Ovid agrees, observing that the laws permit us to take up arms against those that bear them. Irrespective of the opinion of lawyers and human right advocate, after examining the sources of right, the first and most general question that occurs, is whether any war is just, or if it is ever lawful to make war. But this question like many others that follow, must in the first place be compared with the rights of nature. Cicero in the third book of his Bounds of Good and Evil, and in other parts of his works, proves with great erudition from the writings of the Stoics, that there are certain first principles of nature, called by the Greeks the first natural impressions, which are succeeded by other principles of obligation superior even to the first impressions themselves. He calls the care, which every animal, from the moment of its birth, feels for itself and the preservation of its condition, its abhorrence of destruction, and of every thing that threatens death, a principle of nature. Hence, he says, it happens, that if left to his own choice, every man would prefer a sound and perfect to a mutilated and deformed body. So that preserving ourselves in a natural state, and holding to every thing conformable and averting every thing repugnant to nature is the first duty.

]]> By: 13 http://www.darkcoding.net/strategy/international-law-and-the-use-of-force/comment-page-1/#comment-1000 13 Fri, 23 Dec 2005 17:42:59 +0000 http://gkgk/index.php/strategy/international-law-and-the-use-of-force/#comment-1000 Law is created merely for economy. Application of law is for control. Following law is an infringement of freedom. We all know the difference between acceptable and unacceptable. The unwritten laws of the universe: 1. Love of self. 2. Love of man. You figure out the rest. Key words: Love, Loyalty, Respect, Honesty, Honor, Pride One World, One Love, One Mind "Freedom of Choice" Law is created merely for economy.
Application of law is for control.
Following law is an infringement of freedom.

We all know the difference between acceptable and unacceptable.

The unwritten laws of the universe:
1. Love of self.
2. Love of man.

You figure out the rest. Key words: Love, Loyalty, Respect, Honesty, Honor, Pride

One World, One Love, One Mind

“Freedom of Choice”

]]> By: Chloé http://www.darkcoding.net/strategy/international-law-and-the-use-of-force/comment-page-1/#comment-553 Chloé Mon, 28 Nov 2005 15:58:06 +0000 http://gkgk/index.php/strategy/international-law-and-the-use-of-force/#comment-553 I don't have a comment but a question! I am a student and I have an essay to hand in about the use of force. Could you possibly give me some advice on my essay? Here is an outline of how I think I will organise my essay: I. the law on the use of force is controversial because often the states manipulate it a. in the last 50 years some countries just avoided tu use the term "war" in their conflicts with other states -> made it legal. ex : invasion of Mandchouria by Japan, of Ethiopia by Italy b. states justify the use of force by abusing of the self-defense principle. ex: USA with Nicaragua II. the law on the use of force is also ineffective and controversial because it is inadequate a. today most conflicts involving the use of force take place on a state level, not between the states, thus tha law is ineffective as far as intra-state wars are concerned. b. the law is incomplete, it doesn't say anything about forces other than military, like economic force (embargo). c. new type of war in which th use of force is involved: terrorism. But the law on the use of force doesn't say anything about it. The question is: "the law on the use of force is one of the most controversial areas of international law and one where the law may seem uneffective", discuss this statement. The problem is that I have never studied law, I am a language student (I am on an exchange program and I had to take the "international law and institutions" module, which is an advanced module). It would help me a lot if you could tell me how I could improve and complete this essay. Thank you very much. I don’t have a comment but a question!

I am a student and I have an essay to hand in about the use of force.
Could you possibly give me some advice on my essay?

Here is an outline of how I think I will organise my essay:

I. the law on the use of force is controversial because often the states manipulate it
a. in the last 50 years some countries just avoided tu use the term “war” in their conflicts with other states -> made it legal. ex : invasion of Mandchouria by Japan, of Ethiopia by Italy
b. states justify the use of force by abusing of the self-defense principle. ex: USA with Nicaragua

II. the law on the use of force is also ineffective and controversial because it is inadequate
a. today most conflicts involving the use of force take place on a state level, not between the states, thus tha law is ineffective as far as intra-state wars are concerned.
b. the law is incomplete, it doesn’t say anything about forces other than military, like economic force (embargo).
c. new type of war in which th use of force is involved: terrorism. But the law on the use of force doesn’t say anything about it.

The question is: “the law on the use of force is one of the most controversial areas of international law and one where the law may seem uneffective”, discuss this statement.

The problem is that I have never studied law, I am a language student (I am on an exchange program and I had to take the “international law and institutions” module, which is an advanced module). It would help me a lot if you could tell me how I could improve and complete this essay.
Thank you very much.

]]>