Politics and Philosophy: Charging the US with War Crimes

[vinva]

crazyhorse, since you're back...

Please prove that the specific bombs that we are using are banned.

[brewdogmike]

You have also forgotten that I am an Indian, the only true American presently involved in our conversation. Your people came here unwelcomed, lied about everything, tore uo everything, gunned down everything that moved, made slave of you own people, and have just about proven yourselves to be the most disgusting people on earth.

I am a true American, and I resent your statement.

[Crazyhorse1]

To one and all.

This is the best explanation I know of how cluster bombs developed to a point they fit they definition of a banned weapon and then were classified as such by the U.S. and the rest of the world. It also details Rumsfeld decision to use them anyway and its consequence.

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0126-04.htm

[Thiebear]

There is no mention of uniforms in the Geneva Conventions. Please stop saying there is. It makes you seem like someone who get his news from Fox.

Also, please note that both Al Qaida and Iraqi insurgents have a command structure and carry weapons openly. Also, try to understand that the Conventions protect civilians.

o.k. from YOUR link

Article 4

A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy:

1. Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.

2. Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions:

(a) That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;

( That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance; **** THIS IS CALLED A UNIFORM *****

© That of carrying arms openly; **** THEY DON'T **** they blend...

(d) That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war. ***** THEY DON'T ******

3. Members of regular armed forces who profess allegiance to a government or an authority not recognized by the Detaining Power.

4. Persons who accompany the armed forces without actually being members thereof, such as civilian members of military aircraft crews, war correspondents, supply contractors, members of labour units or of services responsible for the welfare of the armed forces, provided that they have received authorization from the armed forces which they accompany, who shall provide them for that purpose with an identity card similar to the annexed model.

5. Members of crews, including masters, pilots and apprentices, of the merchant marine and the crews of civil aircraft of the Parties to the conflict, who do not benefit by more favourable treatment under any other provisions of international law.

6. Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory, who on the approach of the enemy spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, without having had time to form themselves into regular armed units, provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war.

B. The following shall likewise be treated as prisoners of war under the present Convention:

1. Persons belonging, or having belonged, to the armed forces of the occupied country, if the occupying Power considers it necessary by reason of such allegiance to intern them, even though it has originally liberated them while hostilities were going on outside the territory it occupies, in particular where such persons have made an unsuccessful attempt to rejoin the armed forces to which they belong and which are engaged in combat, or where they fail to comply with a summons made to them with a view to internment.

Nice try on the Fox news thing though.

Could you point out the Command Structure?

I posted before I have Indian Heritage... blah blah blah being born in America makes you Native...

[Mass_SkinsFan]

You have also forgotten that I am an Indian, the only true American presently involved in our conversation. Your people came here unwelcomed, lied about everything, tore uo everything, gunned down everything that moved, made slave of you own people, and have just about proven yourselves to be the most disgusting people on earth.

Crazyhorse,

Maybe you should take some of that resentment and direct it towards your forefathers in New England who assisted the Pilgrims in gaining a foothold on this continent. Whereas your forebearers in the Roanoke, VA and Northern Maine areas used violent force to drive the European invaders (Roanoke colonists & Vikings) from this continent, the natives around the Massachusetts Bay welcomed these visitors and assisted them in learning to survive. Only to have that friendship and trust betrayed within a couple of decades.

Of course we're now making the exact same mistake when it comes to America's borders.

[vinva]

To one and all.

This is the best explanation I know of how cluster bombs developed to a point they fit they definition of a banned weapon and then were classified as such by the U.S. and the rest of the world. It also details Rumsfeld decision to use them anyway and its consequence.

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0126-04.htm

Come on now...you link an op-ed piece from common dreams and call that proof? What would you say if all I quoted was newsmax when arguing with you? This is this guy's interpretation of the article 85...it is by no means a legitimate study and has no legal backing. Care to try again?

[Thiebear]

CommonDreams.org is your source for Cluster Bombs being banned?

It also talks about Haliburton detention centers?

Halliburton's Immigrant Detention Centers

by Ruth Conniff

While thousands of people were celebrating the contribution America's undocumented immigrants make to our economy, and demanding justice and recognition for workers who are denied basic rights, the government was making plans for large-scale detention centers in case of an "emergency influx" of immigrants.

KBR, the Halliburton subsidiary recently reprimanded for gross overcharging in its military contracts in Iraq, won a $385 million contract to build the centers. According to the Halliburton website -- www.Halliburton.com -- "the contract, which is effective immediately, provides for establishing temporary detention and processing capabilities to augment existing ICE Detention and Removal Operations Program facilities in the event of an emergency influx of immigrants into the U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs."

[brewdogmike]

To one and all.

This is the best explanation I know of how cluster bombs developed to a point they fit they definition of a banned weapon and then were classified as such by the U.S. and the rest of the world. It also details Rumsfeld decision to use them anyway and its consequence.

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0126-04.htm

Here's the relevant portion of the Geneva Conventions:

4. Indiscriminate attacks are prohibited. Indiscriminate attacks are: (a) those which are not directed at a specific military objective; ( those which employ a method or means of combat which cannot be directed at a specific military objective; or © those which employ a method or means of combat the effects of which cannot be limited as required by this Protocol;

and consequently, in each such case, are of a nature to strike military objectives and civilians or civilian objects without distinction.

5. Among others, the following types of attacks are to be considered as indiscriminate: (a) an attack by bombardment by any methods or means which treats as a single military objective a number of clearly separated and distinct military objectives located in a city, town, village or other area containing a similar concentration of civilians or civilian objects;

and

( an attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.

Now, I certainly don't agree with the "progressive" opinion that the use of cluster munitions is automatically a "war crime." I think if the Armed Forces feel that cluster munitions are the best choice for getting the job done, they're going to make the right call. Furthermore, if you read the section, you can see it is aimed at curtailing the use of weapons that "cannot be limited," and "are of a nature to strike military objectives and civilians or civilian objects without distinction." For one thing, this doesn't mean misdirected weapons, bombs that fall short, etc. For another thing, any bomb is by its nature "capable of being limited" to a certain target. What this section had in mind is doing away with things like the indiscriminate release of mustard gas -- like Saddam Hussein did.

Do bad things happen to innocent people in war? Sure. But that doesn't make every instance of it a "war crime," despite the fevered imagination of the fringe left.

[Brianbien83]

People who harm prisoners in any way are war criminals and should be punished by international law. Yes, there are tapes of of the murder of U.S.detainees as well as Iraqi detainees and pictures of U.S. torture. Rumsfeld signed General Miller's torture order at Abu Ghraib and personally supervised the torture of a prisoner at Gitmo. Rummy and Gonzalez admit coming up with techniques used to interrogate prisoners and vehemently defend them. They include water boarding and the used of nudity, as well as causing extreme fatigue, all in violation of the Geneva Conventions.

The administration not only admits it, it defends it. So it is impossible to argue it doesn't commit war crimes in this area.

Can I see the pictures of the murder of individuals detained by the United States please? Do you have them? Can I see your copy of the signed order? What type of torture was used at Gitmo? Do you have visual evidence of that torture (at Gitmo)? According to the Conventions, humiliation is a form of torture. I stand corrected on that point. Now, however, I simply disagree with the conventions on that point. What about the war crimes being perpetrated upon the U.S. by insurgents or Al-Qaeda? Don't really see a call for those folks to be brought up for war crimes.

[Thiebear]

Calling Crazy

Calling Crazyhorse

You did see that part about Uniforms right?

I should ignore you but since you had to quote me directly.. i figured I'd use your one link to crush your commondreams.org reading frenzy... ( i can't believe you slapped at Fox and quoted from commondreams.org on the SAME page).

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

Bwahaha

Yeah, I would love to see someone try and bring any of our leaders to the Hauge

The backlash of the American people would be out of this world

The sad thing is that even if any of our leaders were guilty of war crimes,

I doubt many Americans would believe (or choose not to believe) it. :doh:

[brewdogmike]

The sad thing is that even if any of our leaders were guilty of war crimes,

I doubt many Americans would believe (or choose not to believe) it. :doh:

I think it's more sad that many Americans believe that our Armed Forces and our leaders are guilty of war crimes -- without any evidence. :doh: :doh:

[Predicto]

why are you so willing to condem the US? what was the batahn death march? hmm? how many japs were actually tried in the world courts for that? .

Actually, quite a few Japanese leaders were executed after the war for things like that.

[Predicto]

Weapons that kill indiscriminately (cluster bombs) are specifically banned. Causing excessive loss of civilian life is a war crime (we've killed over 250,000 Iraqis while claiming to kill 35,000), the attack on a Faluja (a residental area) was a war crime), a policy of torture has been admitted by the White House and defended, and starting an aggressive war based on phoney info is also a war crime. The case is a slam dunk.

Like I said, you keep believing that. I know different.

[Predicto]

And here we have Oakton's entire "contribution" to this thread:

6 posts.

5 posts containing words.

9 insults.

1 piece of information brought to the debate.

Better than usual.

Yeah, he's on a roll. Soon he might reach NavyDave level.

[Crazyhorse1]

Come on now...you link an op-ed piece from common dreams and call that proof? What would you say if all I quoted was newsmax when arguing with you? This is this guy's interpretation of the article 85...it is by no means a legitimate study and has no legal backing. Care to try again?

Learn to read. I didn't call it a proof. I called it an explanation of exactly what it is. I made no claim as to its legal backing. It does cite relevalent portions of the convention, however.

[Crazyhorse1]

Can I see the pictures of the murder of individuals detained by the United States please? Do you have them? Can I see your copy of the signed order? What type of torture was used at Gitmo? Do you have visual evidence of that torture (at Gitmo)? According to the Conventions, humiliation is a form of torture. I stand corrected on that point. Now, however, I simply disagree with the conventions on that point. What about the war crimes being perpetrated upon the U.S. by insurgents or Al-Qaeda? Don't really see a call for those folks to be brought up for war crimes.

Salon magazine has released pictures of a murdered Iraqis detainee who is iced down and being embraced by the Harmon woman. There are numerous pictures of Iraqi detainees being tortured: pictures of dogs both threatening and biting Iraqis, Iraqis being forced to stand on platforms in hoods, Iraqis smeared with excrement, etc. Naked piles, sleep deprivation, sleeping in excrement, forced exhaustion, torment by exhaustion were all used by General Miller and Rumsfeld at Gitmo. Rumfeld personally directed the torture of a detainee. Both Al Qaeda and Iraqi insurgents will be charged with war crimes, as well as the Taliban and our allies in Afghanistan.

[Air Force Cane]

Could you just move to France already Crazyhorse? you would probably be happier there..

[skinfan133]

Actually, quite a few Japanese leaders were executed after the war for things like that.

was hirohito executed? i rest my case. hirohito was actually left IN POWER

[Crazyhorse1]

There is no mention of uniforms in the Geneva Conventions. Please stop saying there is. It makes you seem like someone who get his news from Fox.

Also, please note that both Al Qaida and Iraqi insurgents have a command structure and carry weapons openly. Also, try to understand that the Conventions protect civilians.

o.k. from YOUR link

Nice try on the Fox news thing though.

Could you point out the Command Structure?

I posted before I have Indian Heritage... blah blah blah being born in America makes you Native...

That quote doesn't = uniforms. A sign can be a banner, a flag, a turban, etc. There is no requirement for uniforms. None. You weren't in the conversation when I made the true American remark. I regard you and others on the site as true Americans...actually I regard everybody as a true American except the guy who told me I wasn't a true American. I wanted him to know how it feels.

[Crazyhorse1]

this time im truly done for the night, crazyhorse, man i weep for my country knowing there ae peope like you out there.

Yeah, it's really tough when your countrymen lose their way and decide to obey the law.

[Crazyhorse1]

Come on now...you link an op-ed piece from common dreams and call that proof? What would you say if all I quoted was newsmax when arguing with you? This is this guy's interpretation of the article 85...it is by no means a legitimate study and has no legal backing. Care to try again?

Learn to read. I didn't call it a proof. I called it an explanation of exactly what it is. I made no claim as to its legal backing. It does cite relevalent portions of the convention, however.

[Crazyhorse1]

Many legal scholars disagree with you...

Gonzalez and Harriet Miers.

[Crazyhorse1]

I am a true American, and I resent your statement.

You weren't involved in the conversation at the time.

[Crazyhorse1]

I think it's more sad that many Americans believe that our Armed Forces and our leaders are guilty of war crimes -- without any evidence. :doh: :doh:

We are drowning in evidence.