Military Law and Military Justice  Essay

Excerpt from Essay :

Terrorists operate like spies and not like soldiers. For this reason, terrorists are not regarded as members of the combat concerning the conventions and treaties that ban torture. Therefore, it is normal for them to be given a different treatment when they are captured. This approach suggests that terrorists undertake actions that exclude them from protection from torture as indicated in treaties such as the Geneva Conventions (Hall 27). Their actions justify the argument that terrorists should not be given the legal protection normally given to other citizens on the foundation of law. Moreover, terrorism has created the foundation of the global context that provides justification to the suspension of the rights of suspects. People who are suspected to assist terrorists or to be part of terrorism groups do not belong to humanity. Therefore, it is possible and necessary for them to be tortured if this is the only means of obtaining information from them.

The issue of preventing terrorist attacks is a matter that requires urgency. Investigators may lack enough time to interrogate suspects thus torture may be the only means of acquiring information quickly. For example, if the matter were about a ticking time bomb, this situation would probably call for a serious imminent threat that justifies the use of torture. Preventing a bomb from exploding is crucial if it is likely to send thousands of people to death. The rationales of an exceptional nature and urgency have been widely used to provide justification to torture and detention of terrorism suspects. Many authors have justified torture and detention when they are the only means of averting serious crimes and imminent threat. In this context, it is necessary to violate the rights of terrorism suspects in order to defend the rights of potential victims of terrorism (McCormack 49).

What are the short- and long-term implications of Peace and Anti-War movements on American politics?

The Peace and Anti-War movements had vital short- and long-term impacts on American politics. The movement weakened support for the Republican Party and contributed to the taking over of the Democratic Party. However, the impact of the anti-war movement cannot be separated from the loss of the president's party experienced in the midterm elections, in 2006. Nevertheless, the newly elected democratic majorities failed to enact the anti-war Legislations that they designed. Further, they did not make effective use of power provided by the purse in restraining the Bush administration from war powers (Hall 66).

The Peace and Anti-War movements helped the U.S. In establishing credibility by creating space for the government is represented in anti-war rallies. The Peace and Anti-War movements helped senator Barrack Obama to win the 2008 contest against Hillary Clinton paving the way for his victory as the U.S. president. Moreover, the Peace and Anti-War policies are different from those might have been introduced by other presidential candidates like President John McCain. In implementing the policies, President John McCain would have withdrawn U.S. military forces from Iraq just as Obama did. He would have focused mostly on a residual military force in areas of Iraq. However, it remains unclear whether McCain would have brought to an end the conflict in Afghanistan as Obama did (Hall 73).

The election of Barrack Obama as the president of America played a fundamental role in demobilizing the Peace and Anti-War movements. As a result, the Peace and Anti-War movements have since been in abeyance. However, hardcore opponents of anti-war movements continue to protests against anti-war activities. Nevertheless, their activities are conducted under other movements like Wall Street. The Anti-War movements resulted in a non-violent and non-disruptive nature of the anti-war policy. During the Bush administration, Protest had become a normal political routine for social movements. However, politicians were no longer paying attention to activities of such movements when they considered it unthreatening. During the Antiwar movements, violence between demonstrators who clashed with the police appeared to move policy towards the direction of the perpetrators of violence (McCormack 188).

Works Cited

McCormack, Wayne. Understanding the Law of Terrorism. New York: Lexis Nexis, 2007. Print

Hall, Simon. Peace and Freedom: The…

Sources Used in Documents:

Works Cited

McCormack, Wayne. Understanding the Law of Terrorism. New York: Lexis Nexis, 2007. Print

Hall, Simon. Peace and Freedom: The Civil Rights and Antiwar Movements in the 1960s.

Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2011. Print

Cite This Essay:

"Military Law And Military Justice " (2012, November 23) Retrieved August 7, 2020, from

"Military Law And Military Justice " 23 November 2012. Web.7 August. 2020. <>

"Military Law And Military Justice ", 23 November 2012, Accessed.7 August. 2020,