As to this, you presume too much:

from S
In law school, as you surely recall, it is the exact opposite.
and for breakfast this morning, I had ???

Seriously, I agree with your analysis:

The graduate approach is to familiarize students with basic concepts and to apply them, with the intent of being able to interact intelligently with a legal professional. For example, in business school, the goal was for students to better interact with their in-house counsel. There is little to no emphasis on understanding how the law evolved, how to attempt to change it, and we never read a single case.
but it does depend on how the classes are taught - case by case analysis, etc.

That having been said, I was never fond of the typical Socratic case by case approach, and had a hell of a time with it. Fortunately, I found the wonderful world of hornbooks, which gave me the needed perspective and overview to "ace" first year.

As to a JD, I don't know whether there are schools equivalent to AMU that offer that. Also, there is the purpose for which the courses are taken - unless you want to be a practicing lawyer (civilian or military), a JD is just fancy window dressing. Nice window dressing though. It's worked for a few generals.

One way to approach AMU Legal Studies (which may well be a liaison type program as you mentioned) would be to try a few courses. In the Core, the two Criminal Law and Procedure courses, and the Constitutional Law course, would be my choice for starters. All fit into background for the UCMJ. Then follow up with International Law, Islamist Lawfare and Law of Armed Conflict.

So, a number of choices.

Regards

Mike