0
Extreme military necessity excuses acts that are normally considered war crimes under the Law of War?
Wiki User
∙ 13y ago
False.
More importantly, this has been expressly rejected as a legal defense to accusations of a War Crime. In no case (even in situations where the extermination of the unit - and possible total death of all members - is a likelihood) is a military unit excused from obeying the accepted laws of war. The international community has decided that certain actions are never justifiable, under any circumstances.
Wiki User
∙ 13y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Why might a nation turn to military leaders and extreme nationalists during a time of crisis?
. A nation might turn to military leaders and Extreme Nationalists during a time of crisis because these leaders have a far greater sense of nationalism than government leaders or politicians. This sense of nationalism would inspire the people and make them far more likely to get through the crisis at hand.
When does civilian law supersede military law?
Civilian law is typically always in place. Military law is only invoked in extreme emergencies. However, military personnel are always subject to military law. The Adjutant General will negotiate with the civilian authorities if there is any situation where it is not definite as to which takes precedence. Actually, in the United States, no military person (or, for that matter, anyone other than the Judical Branch) can arbitrarily decide to enforce military law in a place where it is not currently in place. Not even the President can decide to apply military law in a place where civil law is currently in force (indeed, this is one of the major contentious issues around the classification of terrorists as "enemy combatants", and the legality of this move is still being subject to litigation). The misnowmer "martial law" does not actually apply Military Law, but rather enforce a certain subsection of civilian law. For instance, let's say that there is major rioting in a city, and the National Guard is called in to restore order, and "martial law" is declared by the city's major (or perhaps, the state governor). Members of the National Guard are subject to Military law, and any infractions they commit will naturally be covered by military trial. HOWEVER, should a National Guardsman capture a looter (or other criminal), they are then prosecuted under CIVILIAN LAW, even though "martial law" was declared. Martial law in this case is a specific subsection of civilian law, which criminalizes certain activities which are normally permissible under ordinary civilian law. Back to the original question: as Congress is the creator of both military and civilian law, it can decide whether civilian or military law applies in a situation where the military normally has first jurisdiction. There are a myriad number of places this can occur, so naming them all is not possible. In addition, the Constitution is still the highest law of the land, and is supreme over both military and civilian law. Do note that many crimes are not covered by military law, but only civilian law, so it is entirely possible for a person normally subject to military jurisdiction to be prosecuted by civilian authorities without military acquiecence. For example, Insider Trading is a civilian crime, with no military equivalent, so it would be entirely possible to charge a military serviceperson on a military base with this civilian crime.
How did France and Britain respond to fascist aggresion during the 1930s?
Their policy was to appease Nazi Germany because they knew that they didn't have the military ability to do anything about Hitler's expansionist plans.
What country was Alaska purchased from?
Russia. The purchase was considered to have been a major error in judgment in the extreme that it was known as Seward's Folly for years.
What was the name of the German ruling party?
NSDAP National Socialist German Workers Party. NAZI Party
Extreme military necessity excuses acts that are normally considered war crimes under LOAC?
false
Are extreme military necessity excuses acts that are normally considered war crimes under LOAC?
false
Where are answers to loac test?
Extreme military necessity excuses acts that are normally considered war crimes under LOAC
Extreme military necessity excuses acts that are normally considered war crimes under the law of armed conflict?
FALSE
Does extreme military necessity excuse what are normally considered war crimes under the laws of war?
No. Implicit in the concept of "war crimes" is the understanding that the exigencies of war excuse certain acts that would otherwise be considered illegal. Any act, therefore, that falls outside what is considered acceptable during wartime would still be considered a war crime, regardless of the "necessity." In other words, the concept of "military necessity" has already taken into consideration when deciding what is, and what is not, a war crime.
How do you oil the sa80 in extreme conditions?
Depending on the extreme conditions, you would generally oil it as you would normally.
What are the release dates for Extreme Machines - 1997 Military Land Power?
Extreme Machines - 1997 Military Land Power was released on: USA: 9 December 2002
What does essential mean try to keep the explanation simple?
The word Essential means something that is of extreme importance and an absolute necessity.
What can be considered an extreme form of rebreathing?
holding your breath is an extreme form of rebreathing
What indicated extreme nationalism?
military action in the name of superiority
What else was Greece military used for?
The Greek military was also used to maintain the peace in Greece. Extreme villains were sometimes dealt with by the military.
Is extreme self disclosure by therapist normal And how do you deal with it?
No, it is not normal. It is normally considered very taboo in fact. If your therapist told you just one thing to show you that they understood what you were talking about that is fine. This is Limited Self Disclosure and in some circumstances is considered a therapeutic necessity. However if it went beyond that it is very unusual and maybe it is something you should address in your next session by telling the therapist it made you very uncomfortable. If you are at a 'clinic' where there are senior staff you can then choose to take it further if you feel you are not able to deal with it in your 50 mins.
