Talk:Voluntary war

Davidbena (talk) 21:37, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

History
The theorem had been advanced in the 2nd-century CE that "war comes into the world because of a delay of judgment and because of the miscarriage of justice, and because of those who wrongfully apply the constitution," The way to prosecute the war differs according to a nation's constitution, and is mostly grounded, both, in reason and in a country's Theocentric view.

International law may, occasionally, come in conflict with local, written constitutions having the force of law, such as where the UN Charter prohibits "the use of force" (Article 2, paragraph 4), as well as "the threat of the use of force," etc., in an effort to resolve disputes between nations, but where a local, written constitution may allow for such methods when the state's security is thought to be threatened.

Roman law
The traditional laws of war, as defined in Roman law under the term occupatio rerum hostilium, or more commonly as occupatio bellica, provide for the occupation of the enemy's land after a victorious war, while the things belonging to the enemy are conveyed to the state on the condition that they were seized in war time by a common action of the army as booty. If, however, chattels were seized during an isolated military operation by a lone soldier, they became his property. Occupation of immovable property (e.g. lands; buildings) was excluded from such kind of acquisition of private ownership, since they were always acquired for the state.

Lands acquired through an act of war became known as agar occupatorius (occupied territory), in ordinary Roman law. Such lands were not only occupied by the victors, but effectually annexed to the territory of the conquering state. Just as in modern law, where there were occasionally conflicts between a newer statute having international implications (such as a law enshrined in 19th-century law) and an older, more provincial law, and where there have been precedents where the older and more provincial law prevailed, so, too, there have been cases in antiquity where legislators in ancient societies have enacted countervailing statutes to ensure the preservation and keeping of their own ancient laws and polity. Thus, using the nation of Israel as a case study, in the 1st and 2nd centuries CE, when the Imperial Roman army took lands away from Jewish peasants in Palestine by force, a statute was devised by the rabbis under the laws governing Sicaricon ("the usurping occupant"), whereby any prospective buyer of such expropriated land was first required, by rabbinic edict, to gain the willful consent of the land's original owner, or of his heirs, before he could legally purchase the field held by a sicaricon. The original Jewish owner, or his heirs, retained the right of first refusal. In modern history, the same rule has been the practice whenever a local statute stands in direct contradiction to customary international law.

Jewish law
As with ancient Rome, the laws governing the conduct of warfare (jus in bello) among civilised nations were often given an air of "legal status" by the writs then issuing in their legislative bodies and which were often enshrined in their constitutions. The nation of Israel, in the Late Bronze Age, had as its constitution that of the Hexateuch, namely, the Five Books of Moses and the Book of Joshua, and which the nation of Israel viewed as having an ascendancy over all other constitutions used in the Old World, as well as over all other legal codes that were to be subsequently compiled and written in future generations, being of a later origin. According to Alt, the Mosaic law was originally a "customary law," later given a fixed literary form and "included in a unified legal corpus."

International law
Women are protected under the laws of the UN against rape and other forms of sexual violence committed by soldiers of the occupying forces (The Third Geneva Convention of 1949 [in Articles 13 to 16]). -Davidbena (talk) 11:40, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

"Traditional laws of armed conflict" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Traditional_laws_of_armed_conflict&redirect=no Traditional laws of armed conflict] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. voorts (talk/contributions) 22:51, 29 May 2024 (UTC)