|
||||||
 |
|
|
|
|||
 |
||||||
|
|
|
||||
|
||||||
|
|
Sarah Elizabeth Kreps on Memorial Day
May-29-06 12:20 pm
Sarah Elizabeth Kreps, a Senior Fellow in the Institute for International Law and Politics at Georgetown and a adjunct professor at the George Washington University has an excellent op ed in today's Washington Post. Entitled, "Grateful for our Liberties," the piece begins with The Killer Angels:
One of the early scenes of Michael Shaara's book about the Civil War, "The Killer Angels," presents the commander of the 20th Maine Regiment, Col. Joshua Chamberlain, with 120 mutineers from the 2nd Maine. Chamberlain is informed that the mutineers had accidentally signed up for three years while the rest of their regiment had signed up for two and had since gone home. As the Battle of Gettysburg nears, Chamberlain must advance his regiment and determine how to handle the mutineers. In a great display of leadership, he delivers a rousing speech:Kreps observes: On Memorial Day, this passage offers two important reminders. First, at many moments in its history the United States could have taken a dramatically different course without the commitment of the military. Second, we tend to romanticize the causes for which soldiers have fought in the past: for independence in the Revolutionary War, abolition in the Civil War, against aggression in World Wars I and II. But it is instructive that even the soldiers in these wars were at times unclear as to their immediate purpose. They were ultimately driven by the hope that they were part of an army that was helping perpetuate the freedoms they had been given and passing along those freedoms to others. Even amid the political acrimony that sometimes surrounded decisions about war, soldiers rose above the chaff and performed their duty with integrity. So it is today with the service men and women fighting in Iraq, Afghanistan and fronts on the war against terrorism, both at home and abroad. They have volunteered to serve their country, driven less by a tangible antagonism to a particular adversary than by a fundamental sense of the long term and the freedoms they are seeking to preserve. Tags9/11 Commission aggression Alien Tort Statute censorship CIA civil liberties civil rights civil war climate change compensation Congress contractors crimes against humanity customary international law cyber security democracy detainee detainees detainess development diplomatic immunity electronic surveillance enemy combatant enemy combatants enviromental law environmental law expropriation extradition foreign law game theory genocide global economy habeas corpus human right human rights humanitarian assistance intelligence International Court of Justice international courts International Criminal Court international criminal law international environmental law international finance international health international law international legal theory international trade just war doctrine law of the sea law of war laws of war military commission military commissions military law multilateral negotiations nationalization natural law North Korea nuclear nonproliferation nuclear proliferation nuclear weapons outer space peacekeeping piracy poverty preemption prisoner of war prisoners of war rendition rule of law self-executing separation of powers sovereign wealth fund sovereignty Supreme Court SWF terrorism torture treaties United Nations universal jurisdiction use of force war crimes |
|
|
||
|
||||||
