On the record
I can only say that such a view of the future is not in accordance with the teachings of the past.
Said by
Thomas Erskine Holland
Source
gutenberg.orgEditor's note · Context
Holland expresses skepticism about a future view that contradicts historical lessons on warfare.
Share
More from Thomas Erskine Holland
What neutral States would ever take up arms for the sole reason that, two Powers being at war, the 'laws of war' had been violated by one or both of the belligerents?
It has now come to cover, and it is the only term which does cover generically, an indeterminate list of unfriendly acts, such as embargo, pacific blockade, seizure of custom-houses, and even occupation of territory, to which resort is had…
The general recognition of these principles, and of those also which relate to prisoners, would mark a distinct step of progress towards the goal pursued with so honourable a persistency by the Institut de Droit International.
It has long been a universally recognised custom of warfare that a flag of truce must not be fired on, and yet we have seen that rule violated on several occasions during the late war.
Other voices in this conversation
