找回密码
 To register

QQ登录

只需一步,快速开始

扫一扫,访问微社区

Titlebook: Britain’s War Powers; The Fall and Rise of Tara McCormack Book 2019 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive licenc

[复制链接]
查看: 11736|回复: 36
发表于 2025-3-21 19:26:36 | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式
期刊全称Britain’s War Powers
期刊简称The Fall and Rise of
影响因子2023Tara McCormack
视频video
发行地址Provides an up to date account of Britain’s war powers and the central questions of authority and legitimacy.Situates the fall and rise of executive authority in the context of the declining legitimac
图书封面Titlebook: Britain’s War Powers; The Fall and Rise of Tara McCormack Book 2019 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive licenc
影响因子.This book provides a state of the art discussion of the royal prerogative over war powers in the UK. This issue has received particular attention over proposed military strikes against the Syrian regime and it was claimed by many observers and scholars that parliament now controls decisions in war. However, the record has been mixed– and the most recent decision by Prime Minister May on Syria in 2018 shows that the executive can re-assert prerogative powers and effectively sidestep parliament. The author argues that these dynamics should be seen in the context of the declining authority of the executive and the legislature and in terms of a policy solution, and ultimately she suggests a War Powers Act as a firmer foundation for Britain’s war powers..
Pindex Book 2019
The information of publication is updating

书目名称Britain’s War Powers影响因子(影响力)




书目名称Britain’s War Powers影响因子(影响力)学科排名




书目名称Britain’s War Powers网络公开度




书目名称Britain’s War Powers网络公开度学科排名




书目名称Britain’s War Powers被引频次




书目名称Britain’s War Powers被引频次学科排名




书目名称Britain’s War Powers年度引用




书目名称Britain’s War Powers年度引用学科排名




书目名称Britain’s War Powers读者反馈




书目名称Britain’s War Powers读者反馈学科排名




单选投票, 共有 1 人参与投票
 

0票 0.00%

Perfect with Aesthetics

 

1票 100.00%

Better Implies Difficulty

 

0票 0.00%

Good and Satisfactory

 

0票 0.00%

Adverse Performance

 

0票 0.00%

Disdainful Garbage

您所在的用户组没有投票权限
发表于 2025-3-21 21:04:59 | 显示全部楼层
发表于 2025-3-22 01:32:10 | 显示全部楼层
发表于 2025-3-22 04:59:14 | 显示全部楼层
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13682-6War Powers Act; British politics; British Syrian strikes; prime minister powers; executive powers; legisl
发表于 2025-3-22 09:32:13 | 显示全部楼层
发表于 2025-3-22 15:59:09 | 显示全部楼层
发表于 2025-3-22 17:46:14 | 显示全部楼层
发表于 2025-3-22 23:27:49 | 显示全部楼层
Conceptualising Securitisation,n on authorising war. The chapter then analyses the way in which the Royal Prerogative became a political concern in the post-Cold War and the problem of legitimacy that was faced by post-Cold War British governments.
发表于 2025-3-23 03:00:28 | 显示全部楼层
发表于 2025-3-23 07:21:15 | 显示全部楼层
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-3372-9reasons put forward by May for not consulting Parliament including the legal basis for the strikes put forward by the government. In conclusion, I argue that the justification for ignoring the new Parliamentary Convention was very weak. An overview of the justifications given and the reality of the
 关于派博传思  派博传思旗下网站  友情链接
派博传思介绍 公司地理位置 论文服务流程 影响因子官网 SITEMAP 大讲堂 北京大学 Oxford Uni. Harvard Uni.
发展历史沿革 期刊点评 投稿经验总结 SCIENCEGARD IMPACTFACTOR 派博系数 清华大学 Yale Uni. Stanford Uni.
|Archiver|手机版|小黑屋| 派博传思国际 ( 京公网安备110108008328) GMT+8, 2025-6-29 09:58
Copyright © 2001-2015 派博传思   京公网安备110108008328 版权所有 All rights reserved
快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表