The Niceties Of War
KMO
Join Date: 2002-11-07 Member: 7617Members
Join Date: 2002-11-07 Member: 7617Members
in Discussions
<div class="IPBDescription">Will conventions be followed?</div> How do we think the USA will treat any captured soldiers in Iraq? Will they continue trying to deny that they're prisoners-of-war and thus not subject to the Geneva Convention? They surely can't claim they're "illegal combatants", or whatever it was in Afghanistan. And if the Iraqis capture any US troops, will they follow the example of Guantanemo Bay for their treatment?
And what would the US do if an Iraqi were to, say, car-bomb a US military base, the Pentagon or the US parliament building (I've forgotten what it's called)? Would they call that a terrorist act? Having attacked Iraq, it wouldn't be any more - it would surely be justified retaliation against a military target, and those committing it would not be subject to prosecution.
That is an important difference - if they had gone in with proper UN authorisation, the Iraqi regime would not have been legally entitled to fight to defend itself. But in this situation it definitely is.
And what would the US do if an Iraqi were to, say, car-bomb a US military base, the Pentagon or the US parliament building (I've forgotten what it's called)? Would they call that a terrorist act? Having attacked Iraq, it wouldn't be any more - it would surely be justified retaliation against a military target, and those committing it would not be subject to prosecution.
That is an important difference - if they had gone in with proper UN authorisation, the Iraqi regime would not have been legally entitled to fight to defend itself. But in this situation it definitely is.
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Oh no coalition forces are freeing the Iraqi people for the wrong reason, lets protest.
Sudan killed 2 million people based on their face, lets go burn the American flag.
Doesn't make sense does it? If people would only put their energies into more important things. I'm sorry if I came off strong, most of you haven't seen what I have.
As for the car-bombing or something similar, it would only be a military strike against a military target if actually carried out by a member of the military and sanctioned by the Iraqi military. Otherwise it still falls into the realm of what can be considered a terrorist act.
This isn't the thread for it, but Soviet, I must say... I wasn't very against this in the first place, and the more I look at reasoning behind it and the legacy dating back to 1991, the more I support it.
<a href='http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/news/opinion/5418975.htm' target='_blank'>A simple answer to the legal question.</a>
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->However, their right to act was not extinguished. The U.N. resolutions granting authority to the United States and our allies to wage war against Iraq were not repealed.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And, except for France and Germany (and Russia?), most of the UN does support the US [now, anyways].
For the present war, POWs will be treated like POWs. However the US is trying to cut down on POWs by allowing some surrendered units to return home as long as they stay out.
www.dictionary.com
Genocide:
n. The systematic and planned extermination of an entire national, racial, <b>political</b>, or ethnic group.
Know and understand that which you speak of.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->For the present war, POWs will be treated like POWs. However the US is trying to cut down on POWs by allowing some surrendered units to return home as long as they stay out. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And again, technically we are not at war. To go to war the president must pass it before congress or whatever. No rules therefore apply.
Also, about the legality thing. I won't argue one way or another because its all too technical to get into. However, the fact of the matter is that we have gone about this all wrong. We have lost the bond we once had with our allies. We have ignored their wishes. Now, I wonder, when the time of need comes, will they be there for us?
Is it better to stand aside while 2 million die or have a couple hundred die and people have thier freedom?
We want them to surrender! We are doing all we can so we dont kill them!
If we did all we can to not kill them then we would not be at war right now. If you catch my drift.
I don't think our government is prepared to handle the extremely delicate political situation which is that of the middle east and more specifically Iraq and its surrounding countries. Countries which are ruled by rutheless fascists.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->However, their right to act was not extinguished. The U.N. resolutions granting authority to the United States and our allies to wage war against Iraq were not repealed.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And, except for France and Germany (and Russia?), most of the UN does support the US [now, anyways]. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I would point out that we would have recieved 4 out 15 UN security council votes (which is why the US pulled back its resolution, it always knew that France, Russia or China would veto it but it wanted the moral position of having a majority) and that in our main allies the population tends to be about 80% against the war. In Britan the labor party is considering calling a vote of no confidence to oust Blair.
Parlimentary democracy <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad.gif'><!--endemo-->
its something which is a key to what we do...
Some people are so naive. The labor party is ignorant, and has the foresight of a small child.
Bah. Stupid party politics.
Bah. Stupid party politics. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Heh, couldn't have said it better. Anyways, I also mentioned mass murder. However, the situation in Sudan is genocide. The Muslim run government is exterminating the Christain dominated south. Why? Because they are Christain. The government has sent several military divisions to assist in the 'final solution.' It saddens me that nothing is being done to them, it shows how great the human race is...
Bah. Stupid party politics. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Heh, couldn't have said it better. Anyways, I also mentioned mass murder. However, the situation in Sudan is genocide. The Muslim run government is exterminating the Christain dominated south. Why? Because they are Christain. The government has sent several military divisions to assist in the 'final solution.' It saddens me that nothing is being done to them, it shows how great the human race is... <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thats a load of crap, one of Hussien's top aids is a christian, Izzat Abraham I believe. Saddam may be an **** but he's a secular one.
Here's a snippit:
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Religious Atmosphere: This country is dominated by Shi'ite Muslims (59.1%) and Sunni Muslims (36.1%). The Christian population is 3.3% with Catholics making up the majority.
Extremist Groups: The Protestant church in Northern Iraq has endured numerous death threats, an assassination of a clerk at a Christian bookstore, and several attacks upon the home of the pastor. It is thought that part of the provocation for these incidents originated in Iran although perpetrated by extremist Muslims from Iraq.
Government: The provisional constitution of 1968 establishes Islam as the state religion.
The government has brutally oppressed the Shi'ite population (the Sunni portion of the population is politically dominant) and the Kurds who live in the northern part of the country. The Assyrian Christians who also live in the North have suffered numerous injustices, including forced relocations and artillery bombardments. The Assyrians are often accused of aiding the Kurds, who are struggling to create their own state. This oppression, although negatively affecting the church isn’t per se religiously motivated.
Recent Actions: February 17, 2003 - A Kurdish Christian convert was shot to death at a taxi station in Zakho, northern Iraq. An Islamic extremist approached taxi driver Ziwar Muhammad Ismail and told him to deny his Christian faith. When Ziwar refused, the other man shot him in the face and chest, shouting "Allahu Akbar" (God is Great). The assassin was pursued and captured by other taxi drivers. (Middle East Concern et al.)
August 15, 2002 - An Assyrian nun, Sister Cecilia Moshi Hanna, was brutally murdered inside of the Sacred Heart of Jesus Monastery in Baghdad. Three armed men stabbed Sister Cecilia with daggers and decapitated her. The body was found the next day by other nuns. Sister Cecilia was alone at the time of the murder. (AINA)
June 29, 2002 - The Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) has refused to allow the Assyrian Church to build a bishopric to serve the northern Iraqi provinces using several unfounded excuses. Ultimately the KDP are working to consolidate their power in the northern Iraqi provinces. (AINA)
Prisoners: There is no evidence that prisoners are being held for their Christian beliefs at this time.
Suggested Actions You Might Take: Pray for the Christians of Iraq that they may be protected from harm and that the Christian message may be heard and received by all. Pray that they may have the chance to serve those who continue to suffer from war and the on-going economic sanctions against Iraq.
Please keep us informed of any replies or results you may receive! Contact ICC by email at icc@persecution.org.
Official Contacts: No official political contacts exist via the U.S. government at this time. The northern part of the country is in the hands of two Kurdish political factions. American connections with these groups are tenuous at best.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Basicly, yeah, it's probably untrue what you say about large-scale persecution, but persecution is persecution nonetheless.
Frankly, it doesnt suprise me.
Luke 12:10 Then he said to them: <span style='color:red'>"Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom.
11 There will be great earthquakes, famines and pestilences in various places, and fearful events and great signs from heaven.
12 "But before all this, they will lay hands on you and persecute you. They will deliver you to synagogues and prisons, and you will be brought before kings and governors, and all on account of my name.</span>
Not just because of that, but if some little bastages at my lunch table laugh at me for beign a Christian, what do you think those same bastages would do if you gave them a gun, raised them in a predjudiced society, and took away most if not all education? Hmm? They sure as hell aren't going to bake me a cake for my religious beliefs.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Thats a load of crap, one of Hussien's top aids is a christian, Izzat Abraham I believe. Saddam may be an **** but he's a secular one. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Saddam has been persecuting other Muslims too. Irrelevant of who he does or does not persecute. It's obvious to say that he is not secular. He's a Muslim and he's persecuting other Muslims too.
To be secular would be for him to not be involved in religion.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Thats a load of crap, one of Hussien's top aids is a christian, Izzat Abraham I believe. Saddam may be an **** but he's a secular one. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Saddam has been persecuting other Muslims too. Irrelevant of who he does or does not persecute. It's obvious to say that he is not secular. He's a Muslim and he's persecuting other Muslims too.
To be secular would be for him to not be involved in religion. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Right. Plus, if he wasn't Islamic, he would have one hell of a time trying to stay in power. Most radical Islamic fundementalists don't take to kindly to aetheists in power.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Thats a load of crap, one of Hussien's top aids is a christian, Izzat Abraham I believe. Saddam may be an **** but he's a secular one. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Saddam has been persecuting other Muslims too. Irrelevant of who he does or does not persecute. It's obvious to say that he is not secular. He's a Muslim and he's persecuting other Muslims too.
To be secular would be for him to not be involved in religion. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Right. Plus, if he wasn't Islamic, he would have one hell of a time trying to stay in power. Most radical Islamic fundementalists don't take to kindly to aetheists in power. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not so much really. Iraq has a fairly modern and secular society (Im pretty sure the head of its old biochem weapons division was a chick) and the Islamist in the society tend to be repressed as they are a danger the Saddam's Rule. The Islamic rhetoric about "The Great Satan" and all that crap is largely a ploy to try and get actual islamic countries to support him. Sure he may be a muslim, but he doesn't let that get in the way of what he wants to do.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Thats a load of crap, one of Hussien's top aids is a christian, Izzat Abraham I believe. Saddam may be an **** but he's a secular one. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Saddam has been persecuting other Muslims too. Irrelevant of who he does or does not persecute. It's obvious to say that he is not secular. He's a Muslim and he's persecuting other Muslims too.
To be secular would be for him to not be involved in religion. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Right. Plus, if he wasn't Islamic, he would have one hell of a time trying to stay in power. Most radical Islamic fundementalists don't take to kindly to aetheists in power. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Iraq's government IS aetheist. Not everything that is evil in the mid-east is islamic...
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Im pretty sure the head of its old biochem weapons division was a chick<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Nice to know hes a equal oppurtunity monster <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
Thats a load of crap, one of Hussien's top aids is a christian, Izzat Abraham I believe. Saddam may be an **** but he's a secular one. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I was talking about SUDAN not Iraq. And Christians are treated as second class citizens in Iraq, not that being Muslim helps you that much either.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Thats a load of crap, one of Hussien's top aids is a christian, Izzat Abraham I believe. Saddam may be an **** but he's a secular one. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Saddam has been persecuting other Muslims too. Irrelevant of who he does or does not persecute. It's obvious to say that he is not secular. He's a Muslim and he's persecuting other Muslims too.
To be secular would be for him to not be involved in religion. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Right. Plus, if he wasn't Islamic, he would have one hell of a time trying to stay in power. Most radical Islamic fundementalists don't take to kindly to aetheists in power. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Iraq's government IS aetheist. Not everything that is evil in the mid-east is islamic... <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Allow me to rehpraise. None of them show outwardly that they are aetheists, at least not to my knowledge. Certainly not every Islamic is evil, I didn't meat to imply that they have no morals, but you have to admit, it'd be a lot easyer to incite riot and rage against invaders if you claimed that God, or Allah, or whoever the hell you pray to, told you to do so.
Iraq is busy parading its captive US soldiers on television, contrary to the Geneva Convention - you're not allowed to use your prisoners-of-war for propaganda purposes, or to subject them to humiliating or degrading treatment.
But maybe the Iraqi regime could try to argue that they're not prisoners-of-war, they're "illegal combatants", like the US's own captives from Afghanistan, who are thus claimed not to be covered by the convention.
Maybe this will bring home the point about <i>why</i> the western powers cannot afford to dismiss international conventions when it suits them. They need to be seen to be above reproach. It's no good worrying about the Geneva Convention only when it's their own soldiers getting captured. <!--emo&:angry:--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/mad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='mad.gif'><!--endemo--> It looks hypocritical and self-serving.
Parlimentary democracy <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad.gif'><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Tony Blair is the best thing to happen to the UK since Churchill.
Politics suck.
Oh no coalition forces are freeing the Iraqi people for the wrong reason, lets protest.
Sudan killed 2 million people based on their face, lets go burn the American flag.
Doesn't make sense does it? If people would only put their energies into more important things. I'm sorry if I came off strong, most of you haven't seen what I have. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sort of off topic from what was just being discussed in the last few posts but i would like to point out "A juicy fact about American History"
Back in the year oh lets say 1994 around about April in a African country known as Rwanda there was something that was known as a genocide happening. The UN was sent in, but because of a single veto vote in the UN security council, the UNAMIR (United Nations Assistance Mission in Rwanda) could not sieze weapons (they knew exactly where they were) arrest/detain leaders of the Hutu militas, which would have basically stopped the genocide. The UN commander in Rwanda begged and begged for weeks a new resoultion allowing the UN to act, but then the killing started which eventually led to the deaths of about 800,000 Tutsis. Now one would wonder what country, in their right mind, would make such a veto vote in the UN security council and cause the deaths of 800,000 innocent civilians? Can you guess.... allow me to give you a hint.... the first word starts with a U the second with a S and the third with a A . Thats right boys and girls, because the USA didn't want to commit their troops and prehaps lose some fighting (like in Somolia (sp?) ) they decided that it would be best to veto the resoultion, which would have saved 800,000 people. So one could infer that the mighty US of A, in all their strenght and good will, allowed this genocide to happen.
/me Claps for American 'nobility'
... "y'all" should be ashamed of your government.
... "y'all" should be ashamed of your government. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Bush was not in power then, Clinton was i could rant on and on about the atrocities of his administration. I hate Clinton but i was never 18 to vote against him. Hes is probably the worst president of the century. I am ashamed to be in a country that had Clinton as president. <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad.gif'><!--endemo-->
That just shows you how the UN is worthless.
Ok here the USA does not get involved into the conflict they voice their opinion in the UN. They dont get involved and people die. The USA used its right to veto. After all most of the problems were caused by the colonial powers.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> The UN is useless because the US decides to do their own thing instead of the UN thing<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So here the USA under a new administration goes to the UN trys to get a resolution to go into Iraq. Countries like France use thier veto so the UN dosent get involved. Kinda like Rwanda but the Bush dosent have to care about the UN no where in the United States constitution does it say anything about the UN.
The UN dosent suck because of the USA it sucks because it is made that way.
... "y'all" should be ashamed of your government. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Bush was not in power then, Clinton was i could rant on and on about the atrocities of his administration. I hate Clinton but i was never 18 to vote against him. Hes is probably the worst president of the century. I am ashamed to be in a country that had Clinton as president. <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad.gif'><!--endemo-->
That just shows you how the UN is worthless. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm always amazed at the venom people have for Clinton. Why exactly do hate him so much? I wasn't a particularly big fan of him but he was certainly not one of the worst.