[Up] [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Terorist-Terrorism & what next?

    I must take issue with your conclusion that the United States is a war criminal in this conflict within Afghanistan.   We were attacked on our own soil, in the heart of one of our cities and 7,000 people from 40 nations were killed.  Those killed were, by the definition of the Geneva Convention, civilians.  They were targeted by members of a military fighting force who knew that they were targeting civilians  and they killed them.  This act of naked aggression must be answered.  If we do not answer, the attacks will continue.  Bin Lauden and his group are similar  to the school yard bully in that they only will stop when presented with force greater than their own.
    I walked over a fair bit of Afghanistan while wearing the uniform of the United States military.  I worked with and helped train some of the people that became the Taliban.  We, the United States,  helped the Taliban and others overthrow the government. That same government has now returned as the Northern Alliance...and we helped them overthrow that same government that we helped overthrow them!
    The mindset of those in power, the Taliban, (remember, I know and trained some of these people) is such that I find it quite reasonable that they harboured and succoured Bin Lauden and his group. I believe that this makes them just as culpable as Bin Lauden and his organization in the attack on the United States and the deaths of  7,000 innocents. Face it, the friend of my enemy is my enemy when they help my enemy hurt me.
    Civilians always get hurt in war. It is a sad situation that has always occurred since we began killing each other.  The  United  States and her allies fighting in Afghanistan are not targeting  civilians. The same can not be said for  Bin Lauden and his allies. This makes our cause, in my humble opinion, just, we avenge those killed in New York and Washington.
    Yours Aye,
Tearlach Sinclair
USMC, retired
Sally Spangler wrote:
Manson was outside the law and yet received a fair trial. What happened
to Mr. Kennedy's killer didn't. The further on of the Kennedy murder is
that the story has been reduced to a murmur, but not totally stopped.
Did the gunman in the window really commit the crime?  if we are
thinking individuals, I think we are, and this particular piece of our
history plays out by bin Laden's death by unknown sources - will there
always be the nagging question - was he truly what the American
Government said he was at the time - the true master-mind, leader,
organizer of the events now happening?  As truly bin Laden is not an
American citizen may I put in some international law that does apply?
It is the Geneva Conventions.  These conventions are not just human
rights and people held prisoner and the wounded, they cover all
subjects. I searched under "Google" last night, The various chapters of
the conventionas adopted on various dates are there for anyone's
One of the newer Geneva Conventions -
I find this one more than interesting!  par 4. The situations referred
to in the
preceding paragraph include armed conflicts in which peoples are
against colonial domination and alien occupation and against racist
regimes in
the exercise of their right of self-determination, as enshrined in the
of the United Nations and the Declaration on Principles of International
concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in
accordance with
the Charter of the United Nations.
I don't think it means America fighting in Afghanistan.

http://www.deoxy.org/wc/wc-proto.htm   Article 49: Definition of Attacks
Scope of Application

        1."Attacks" means acts of violence against the adversary,
whether in
offense or in defense.
        2.The provisions of this Protocol with respect to attacks apply
to all attacks in whatever territory conducted, including the national
territorybelonging to a Party to the conflict but under the control of
an adverse Party.
        3.The provisions of this Section apply to any land, air or sea
warfare which may affect the civilian population, individual civilians
or civilian objects on land. They further apply to all attacks from the
sea or from the air against objectives on land but do not otherwise
affect the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict at
sea or in the air.
        4.The provisions of this Section are additional to the rules
humanitarian protection contained in the Fourth Convention, particularly
in Part II thereof, and in other international agreements binding upon
the High Contracting Parties, as well as to other rules of international
law relating to the protection of civilians and civilian objects on
land, at sea or in the air against the effects of hostilities.

     Chapter II: Civilians and Civilian Population

     Article 50: Definition of Civilians and Civilian Population

        1.A civilian is any person who does not belong to one of the
categories of persons referred to in Article 4 A 111, lIl, (31 and 161
of the Third Convention and in Article 43 of this Protocol. In case of
doubt whether a person is a civilian, that person shall be considered to
be a civilian.
        2.The civilian population comprises all persons who are
        3.The presence within the civilian population of individuals who
do not come within the definition of civilians does not deprive the
population of its civilian character.

     Article 51: Protection of the Civilian Population

        1.The civilian population and individual civilians shall enjoy
general protection against dangers arising from military operations. To
give effect to this protection, the following rules, which are
additional to other applicable rules of international law, shall be
observed in all circumstances.
        2.The civilian population as such, as well as individual
civilians, shall not be the object of attack. Acts or threats of
violence the primary purpose of  which is to spread terror among the
civilian population are prohibited.
        3.Civilians shall enjoy the protection afforded by this Section,
unless and for
such time as they take a direct part in hostilities.
        4.Indiscriminate attacks are prohibited. Indiscriminate attacks
             a.those which are not directed at a specific military
             b.those which employ a method or means of combat which
cannot be directed at a specific military objective; or
             c.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
             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
             b.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.
        6.Attacks against the civilian population or civilians by way
ofreprisals are prohibited.
        7.The presence or movements of the civilian population or
individual civilians
shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military
operations, in particular in attempts to shield military objectives from
attacks or to shield, favor or impede military operations. The Parties
to the conflict shall not direct the movement of the civilian population
or individual civilians in order to attempt to shield military
objectives from attacks or to shield military operations.
        8.Any violation of these prohibitions shall not release the
Parties to the conflict from their legal obligations with respect to the
civilian population and civilians, including the obligation to take the
precautionary measures provided for in Article 57.
and more:

Article 3:    In the case of armed conflict not of an international
character occurring in
the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the
conflict shall be
bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:
To this end, the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any
time and in any
place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:

    (a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds,
mutilation, cruel
treatment, and torture;
    (b) taking of hostages;
    (c) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and
    (d) the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions
without previous
judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the
guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.

Maybe we should publish the Geneva Conventions in America and see what
comes of
that when America discovers that revenge against an purported foe is
counter to
everything we have been espousing. America was signatory to these
I think the take off from here should be on the basis of the Geneva
International Law!  Yes, America is the aggressor!  Yes we are now the
For those of you who want to read further - but this takes quite a while
to load:
PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
That's a heck of a thing to say - but that is what I draw from what I am
In anger and sorrow, Sally

There's nae man sae deif as he tha' winna hear.