Lincoln's Unconstitutional Actions

[Angela]

Is this just me or does this article seem incredibly ignorant of the specific challenges of the nature of this particular conflict and the laws that should apply to the conduct of hostilities and the treatment of criminal citizens vs. enemy combatants?

After all, the Lincoln administration carefully avoided – for an incredibly long time – any act that might accord even the smallest degree of legitimacy to the governments of the rebellious states and thus international laws of war could not be applied. As the transition can certainly be called fluent, should not the arguments presented in the article more precise and specific?

Considering only the political theory and ignoring the military factual situation takes away credibility and makes the statements presented sound a bit superficial. It also doesn’t take into account the conclusions that resulted in the Lieber Code on civil and military conduct in a rebellion/war or its lengthy debate on “military necessity”.

If find these statements, from the point of knowledge that this forum possesses, rather difficult to debate; they seem to be directed at an audience that has yet to gain a more full understanding of the roles of government, military, international law of war and political science.