Reply With Quote
I mean...that’s a pretty easy loophole to take advantage of if there aren’t any qualifiers. Just wondering if there is something that overrides the rule if it’s proven someone is training in cultural sites.
Can't tell if DMC is just playing stupid anymore tbh.
I mean...that’s a pretty easy loophole to take advantage of if there aren’t any qualifiers. Just wondering if there is something that overrides the rule if it’s proven someone is training in cultural sites.
Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions, Article 52, provides for the general protection of civilian objects, hindering attacks to military objectives. Article 52 states, "In so far as objects are concerned, military objectives are limited to those objects which by their nature, location, purpose or use make an effective contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization, in the cir stances ruling at the time, offers a definite military advantage."
Any attack must be justified by military necessity: An attack or action must be intended to help in the military defeat of the enemy, it must be an attack on a military objective,[1] and the harm caused to civilians or civilian property must be proportional and not "excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated".[1]
Some targets are clearly legitimate. These include all military personnel who are not Hors de combat. It also includes anyone who takes a direct part in military hostilities. It also include military equipment and bases and any buildings used as fortifications whether designed as such or used by the military ad hoc.[2]
Civilian infrastructure such as, rail, road, ports, airports and telecommunications used for the transportation of military assets, or used by the military for electronic communications are all considered to be legitimate military targets.[2]
Where it starts to get more nuanced is if the harm to civilians or civilian property is "excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated". During the Second World War there was a song called a thing-ummy-bob which contain the lines "And it's the girl that makes the thing that holds the oil, that oils the ring that works the thing-ummy-bob, that's going to win the war".[3] Whether such a girl is a legitimate target is an area that probably has to be decided on a case by case basis. However Protocol I suggests that if it is not clear, then the parties to the conflict should err on the side of caution as Article 52 states "In case of doubt whether an object which is normally dedicated to civilian purposes, such as a place of worship, a house, or other dwelling or a school, is being used to make an effective contribution to military action, it shall be presumed not to be so used".[1][2]
Notice which article? 52
Surely we can do better than a wikipedia article citing a journalist who died 16 years ago.
TLDR;
DMC conclusion: civilians. A bunch of brownies and muslims.
Nothing about SECDEF Mark Esper slapping down Trump's threat?
https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1...865899521?s=19
Trump couldn't leave it lay after Pompeo and others tried to clean up his mess on Sunday talking head shows. All Trump had to do was say nothing or that he didn't mean what he appeared to be saying.
Instead he doubled down, mere hours after the official. spin, contradicting it, as he's done many times.
By running his big mouth, Trump essentially forced the Pentagon to contradict him in the very the next news cycle.
Can you imagine their reaction if an $80M bounty was placed on Obama’s head?
The Clintons would claim it.
He was cleaning his bow and accidentally shot himself 15 times (high capacity magazine).
Gen. Soleimani “was a war hero”- Iranian Professor
How neoliberal Democrats helped set the stage for Trump's war on Iran
Gen Soleimani Was On Official Saudi Iranian Peace Trip
Pootin visiting Syria, increasing his M/E influence in the geopolitical show started and continued by USA.
Last edited by boutons_deux; 01-07-2020 at 04:48 PM.
Lawrence Wilkerson on Trump's Iran aggression- same neocon lies, new target
Trash/BigOil going after Syria's oil, while blocking Iraq from controlling it oil.
It's all about oil.
Ben Shaprio, the war mongering neocon Jew
...
Iran is going to get lit up
so much for Trump's claim that assassinating Soleimani would deter Iran.
How do you feel about Trump dragging us into war with Iran because he got impeached?
Whenever I see like this first thing that comes to my mind is false flag. Let's investigate. I don't trust the criminals and liars of our government. I don't trust our Zionist Jewish controlled media whatsoever.
False premise. You’re better than that.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
