RE: virus: The Rumsfeld wriggle.

From: Jonathan Davis (jonathan.davis@lineone.net)
Date: Tue May 18 2004 - 10:07:10 MDT

  • Next message: Blunderov: "RE: virus: The Rumsfeld wriggle."

    I am not sure if they are or are not signatories, but regardless the US is
    compelled to obey the rules as long as the other side does too - signatory
    or not.

    I think the quaintness and obsolescence is brought about by the fact that
    interstate warfare is now less common whilst a whole new type of asymmetric
    fighting is emergent.

    The Geneva conventions by their very nature are agreements between countries
    (which seldom fight anymore) whereas modern wars are increasingly civil or
    guerrilla type wars. Here you often have a non-state actor against a
    state-actor with the state-actor showing restraint in the face of
    non-restraint where such restraint not always rational.

    It is for this reason that I think they may need to be updated to reflect
    modern reality and modern warfare. I fully support the Geneva Conventions
    and similar efforts to attenuate the horror of war. But if they are struck
    irrelevant and abandoned because off change circumstances it would be a
    greater pity than if they were to be realistically reappraised and their
    place in modern war assured. One immediate reform could be to make explicit
    its moral authority vis-à-vis Islamic rules of war that accord with the
    conventions.

    Regards

    Jonathan

    -----Original Message-----
    From: owner-virus@lucifer.com [mailto:owner-virus@lucifer.com] On Behalf Of
    Blunderov
    Sent: 18 May 2004 15:08
    To: virus@lucifer.com
    Subject: RE: virus: The Rumsfeld wriggle.

    SNIP

    [Blunderov] What I had more in mind was any future opponent - say Iran or
    North Korea, who knows, maybe one day even China.

    In the future, anyone can claim that the USA considers the Geneva convention
    'obsolete' and 'quaint' and does not therefore qualify for its protections.
    Or that their forces are de facto terrorists.

    The British AFIK have been very quiet on the subject of the Geneva
    Convention but then I think they might be signatories to the International
    Criminal Court. Either that or it's English circumspection.

    Best Regards

    ---
    To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to
    <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
    ---
    To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
    


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue May 18 2004 - 10:07:53 MDT