geneva convention

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
well, iraq shot it out the window.



executing and videotaping the deaths of captured soldiers isn't cool.
«1345

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 90
    I didn't get the specifics. Are they being tortured?
  • Reply 2 of 90
    rodukroduk Posts: 706member
    Hmm, US and UK television shows Iraqi POWs. As soon as Iraq does the same, the US defense secretary is up in arms about it contravening the Geneva convention...

    (okay, the executions weren't cool though)
  • Reply 3 of 90
    brussellbrussell Posts: 9,812member
    I hadn't heard anything about executions. Who's reporting that? I heard they were showing dead bodies as well as interviews with POWs.
  • Reply 4 of 90
    artman @_@artman @_@ Posts: 2,546member
    Welcome to what a fine mess war can be.



    I remember the videos from the previous war. And remember their return...but this war is actually very different. Don't believe anything the middle east says. As like ourselves, they won't give you the truth until they believe it's worth it.



    We may have had a turncoat soldier in Kuwait...now that is new. I have no idea how or why this would happen...totally baffled.



    Rumsfeld was on CNN. Didn't give much, just that the Iraqi regime will fall, no information...blah, blah, blah.



    God, what a mess. The regime may fall but I think this invasion will take much more time and effort (and lives) than before.
  • Reply 5 of 90
    groveratgroverat Posts: 10,872member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by RodUK

    Hmm, US and UK television shows Iraqi POWs. As soon as Iraq does the same, the US defense secretary is up in arms about it contravening the Geneva convention...

    (okay, the executions weren't cool though)




    What are you talking about?
  • Reply 6 of 90
    brussellbrussell Posts: 9,812member
    I haven't seen the videos, but Rumsfeld was complaining about the POWs being shown on TV. There's a line in the Geneva convention on treatment of POWs about protecting them from "public curiousity" that Rumsfeld must have been talking about. I've several times seen footage of Iraqi POWs with their hands tied and laying on the ground, etc. That was wrong.
  • Reply 7 of 90
    rodukroduk Posts: 706member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by groverat

    What are you talking about?



    Err,



    Iraqi forces have paraded what they say are five captured US soldiers on television. They also allowed a TV film crew to record pictures of five bodies said to be Americans.



    Satellite network Al Jazeera took the pictures at Nasiriyah in southern Iraq. The prisoners, including a woman, said they were from the US Army's 507 Maintenance unit.



    US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said the television footage was a violation of the Geneva Convention.





    ITN News



    Perhaps you haven't seen footage of captured and dead Iraqi soldiers on American television, taken by US and UK television crews. \
  • Reply 8 of 90
    newnew Posts: 3,244member
    heh... the double standards of international law...
  • Reply 9 of 90
    dviantdviant Posts: 483member
    Yeah nevermind that the reports are saying that the dead solidiers on Al Jazeera had been shot in the head execution style, displayed by a supposed grinning man who was obviously (to the reporters) proud and happy at this. And that the two wounded/live soldiers were being "interviewed" against their will, showing their faces etc for propaghanda purposes. The inteviewer even held up the wounded man's head to have him talk into the mic. Also keep in mind that this airing was promised to the public hours prior to make sure that everyone knew it was coming that they would watch it.



    Far cry from the guys on the ground with plastic cuffs being filmed from a distance immediately after capture in a firefight. Iraqi POWs will be treated humanely can you safely say the same for Coaltion POWs? I fear not.



    For reference heres the Articles of the Third Geneva Convention...



    It's amazing to me how knee-jerk people are, and how they like to deflect the situation to something that suits their particular cause, glazing over the real issues at hand. In most cases it seems to be less anti-war than anti-bush administration and seems childish and disconserting.
  • Reply 10 of 90
    scottscott Posts: 7,431member
    I fully expect the anti-american "human rights" groups to be mute about this.
  • Reply 11 of 90
    newnew Posts: 3,244member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Scott

    I fully expect the anti-american "human rights" groups to be mute about this.



    So you don't think groups like amnesty have been vocal about Saddams breach of Human Rights?



    linky
  • Reply 12 of 90
    alcimedesalcimedes Posts: 5,486member
    now that's a hardcore army.



    they beat up a maintenance unit.



    impressive.
  • Reply 13 of 90
    bungebunge Posts: 7,329member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by New

    So you don't think groups like amnesty have been vocal about Saddams breach of Human Rights?



    New, what are you trying to do, shatter his veil of ignorance??!?
  • Reply 14 of 90
    groveratgroverat Posts: 10,872member
    No Rod, what does THIS mean?



    Quote:

    As soon as Iraq does the same, the US defense secretary is up in arms about it contravening the Geneva convention



    The same? What's "the same"?
  • Reply 16 of 90
    buonrottobuonrotto Posts: 6,368member
    So much for WOMD...... don't you think Saddam would have used them by now???



    Where, in the middle of the desert? They wouldn't make strategic or tactical sense yet. Remember that Hussein thinks he can squirm out of this, so he has incentive in his head still not to use them. If he is going to use them, it will be in Baghdad, with coalition military in tight proximity to one another and when there's no other means of escape, or if it appears that the end of his regime is inevitable, when there's nothing to lose.
  • Reply 17 of 90
    sdw2001sdw2001 Posts: 17,436member


    OK, one....they weren't part of a uniformed army. We have a real case for that.



    Even trying to make this argument in this thread is inappropriate. Iraq is in clear and undeniable breech of the convention. Problem, is WTF do we do about it?



    On and your last point: You don;t see weapons so they don't exist? Nice 3rd century logic there.
  • Reply 18 of 90
    OMG, I was poking around the Al-Jazeera web site and came upon pictures of one US soldier shot in the head. The picture is very very graphic. I have such a sick feeling now. I can't believe they would post something like that.



    I dont want to go back to that link, but I am interested in what the front page of the site is saying about the war. Is there a way to translate the whole page while viewing & browsing?
  • Reply 19 of 90
    burningwheelburningwheel Posts: 1,827member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Crustibooga



    So much for WOMD...... don't you think Saddam would have used them by now??? [/B]



    nope. if they use them, then the world will turn against them, since it would prove they had WOMD. i think Rumsfiled or a military person or military expert said this. makes sense to me



    i hope this makes sense, sorry really tired right now
  • Reply 20 of 90
    burningwheelburningwheel Posts: 1,827member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by RodUK

    Err,

    [i]



    Perhaps you haven't seen footage of captured and dead Iraqi soldiers on American television, taken by US and UK television crews. \




    nope. read this article.



    "Under the Geneva Convention, it's illegal to do things with prisoners of war that are humiliating to those individuals. And the United



    States, of course, avoids showing photographs of prisoners of war. We have thousands of Iraqi prisoners that are in POW camps that we brought along and have erected in country. But we ... avoid showing photographs of them," Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said on NBC's Meet the Press.



    filming pows
Sign In or Register to comment.