Author
|
Topic: What is the ignificance of the Fourth Geneva Convention? (Read 855 times) |
|
Hermit
Archon
Posts: 4289
Reputation: 8.42
Rate Hermit
Prime example of a practically perfect person
 
|
 |
What is the ignificance of the Fourth Geneva Convention?
« on: 2005-09-21 20:01:05 » |
 |
The US is a founding signator of the Fourth Convention. The Fourth Convention forbids (makes a war crime) out of holding elections in an occupied country.
Consider now the status of Afghanistan.
The recent electoral farce made even the 1986 and 1987 parliamentary national elections held under the Soviets appear "free and fair" in comparison. But given the world's apparant willingness to abandon International and National law, teaties and conventions, should the Bumbling Bush survive his term of office, he should perhaps be careful visiting outside the US in his retirement; lest a momentary attack of conscience inspire his detentention, arraigment and conviction in some more law-abiding clime.
Bleeding priceless isn't it?
Hermit
(Visiting in New Orleans)...
|
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg, 1999
|
|
|
Blunderov
Archon
Gender: 
Posts: 3160
Reputation: 8.23
Rate Blunderov
"We think in generalities, we live in details"
|
|
Re:What is the ignificance of the Fourth Geneva Convention?
« Reply #1 on: 2005-09-22 14:55:10 » |
|
[Blunderov] <wonders what on earth Hermit is doing in NO>
Apparently the democrofascisti have abandoned all pretence of observing the Law of War.
"Basra Withdraws Cooperation Over British Raid
In reaction to the storming of a Basra police station to free two British SAS soldiers by British forces, the Iraqi citys governing council has voted to cease all cooperation with the British until three demands are met. The council seeks an apology, a guarantee that there will not be a repeat incident, and compensation for damage caused during the raid. Controversy and conflicting reports continue to surround the capture and extraction of the two soldiers, who were reported to be dressed in Arabic disguises and to have fired on Basran police during the course of their apprehension. Unconfirmed reports also emerged that the vehicle the soldiers were driving contained explosives."
http://www.atsnn.com/story/172380.html
http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Laws_of_war
"Conduct of warfare
Among other issues, the laws of war address declaration of war, acceptance of surrender and the treatment of prisoners of war; the avoidance of atrocities; the prohibition on deliberately attacking civilians; and the prohibition of certain inhumane weapons. It is a violation of the laws of war to engage in combat without meeting certain requirements, among them the wearing of a distinctive uniform or other easily identifiable badge and the carrying of weapons openly. Impersonating soldiers of the other side by wearing the enemy's uniform and fighting in that uniform, is forbidden, as is the taking of hostages."
[Bl.] Whether the British soldiers were in possession of explosives or not hardly even matters. At the very least they were conducting an armed reconnaisance and were not doing so in a clearly marked uniform; a clear violation. Whether they were actually impersonating the enemy by wearing his uniform seems moot.
"Reputation, reputation, reputation! O, I have lost my reputation! I have lost the immortal part of myself, and what remains is bestial."
(William Shakespeare (1564-1616) Cassio, in Othello, act 2, sc. 3, l. 262-4. On being cashiered for drinking and quarrelling.)
Best Regards.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
