hashtag this
Not warfare Drew.
Simply plain ole murder done for the hell of it. And because they can do it and they can get away with it ... and they have gotten away with much over time .... their motto might well be, What? Me Worry?Meanwhile ... ambulance chasing lawyers in the west and here in the uk most especially, have been looking for proof of war crimes by Brit military, because war has rules ya know and these days you can be sued on the word of one unhappy ding bat with a lawyer.
To be fair to the govt and not misplaced I hope, I think the Brit PM, Cameron has something in place to stop the issuing of warrants against troops, but if I understand correctly, the door is not entirely shut. Yet.The pity is, the side facing the butchers you mention, must abide by rules of some kind.
We must in all cases treat them as if they were actually human.
You can see how that might end if end it ever does.
In a courtroom overseen by the the Hague. And the intl. court does not allow the death penalty.I guess to Obama, and the special snowflakes of color in the UN, Black lives don’t matter.
Indeed. What really, really, REALLY pisses me off about the treatment of th is (do I really have to say what is disgusting about Boko Haram doing this, all to intentionally destroy Nigeria’s future?) is that it completley misses the point of war crimes and international law.
If you actually bother to read things like the Hague Convention and other things, they mention things called “Illegal Combatants”; that those who did not play by the rules outlined there were. And who pointedly DID NOT enjoy its’ privileges because of their perfidy. Which was why the Afghan Warlords who got lucky and destroyed the British army withdrawing from Kabul were not allowed to petition for redress after the British and Indian troops came back and started knocking over their fortified cities and putting their fighters to the bayonet.
Nor were they allowed to have anybody COME and petition on their behalf.
Ditto the Barbary States, even though a lot of what the French military did there was quite immoral and horrid.
Why?
Because they not only had BROKEN the law, they had never accepted the legitimacy of it IN THE FIRST PLACE. Meaning that it was legal for ANY ONE to say, stab them to death when they were down, hang them after they surrendered, or roast them over a split.
International Law was never meant to be a suicide pact where those who subscribed to it were damned to fight against those who Did Not with one hand tied behind their back. It was a promise. That those who signed onto it or respected the honors and traditions of warfare it was based on would adhere to those minimums of behavior, and to Retaliate against anybody violating it.
After all, if you weren’t willing to sign on to the rules limiting what you could do in warfare, what the heck did you have to complain about? This was exactly what you were doing to other people anyway, so turnabout was fair game.
Same reason why when the German Empire broke its’ treaty obligations and entered the abyss that was chemical warfare, its’ enemies responded by dousing them right back.
Was this harder, crueler than today? Yes, I think in some ways it was. But it was also far saner- and dare I say more inclusive?- than what we have now. It recognized that not everybody plays by the same rules, or is protected by laws they don’t follow.
The success of the carrot and stick was a reason WHY this kind of barbarity was so rare in most of the world. And if some steps aren’t done soon, Boko Haram may dictate the future norms of warfare.
Posted by Turtler
02/04/2016 at 06:37 PM
Turtler, very, very well said.
You need to raise hell more often. That belongs on our front page.Off topic. Have you followed at all the lefty students and Rhodes statue demands? They want it down, college refusing so far.
Turtler, very, very well said.
Thank you kindly!
You need to raise hell more often. That belongs on our front page.
I can imagine!
Well, if I had the ability to post on the Front Page or make posts, I’d be happy to start writing up one about this right n ow.
Off topic. Have you followed at all the lefty students and Rhodes statue demands? They want it down, college refusing so far.
I have on some level. To be honest I am somewhat divided on Rhodes, even though I am a self respecting Imperialist and Colonialist myself. I can certainly understand if people in South Africa and Rhodesia wouldn’t want to have statues of him. He wasn’t a pure demon like Mugabe makes him out to be, but he did do plenty of bad things (for instance, going out of his way to destroy one of the world’s most successful color blind electoral systems in the world at the time in Cape Colony).
But even as he was doing that, he helped create one of the world’s first color blind scholarships, and turned Southern Africa into what it is today- by far the most succesful place on the continent (outside of Rhodesia itself, though that is due to Mugabe).
Still, I am loathe to erase the bits of history we find objectionable, and I don’t like destroying statues unless they are of people who TRULY need to be sent a message that we will not respect them. I don’t think Rhodes goes that far.
Posted by Turtler
02/05/2016 at 01:37 PM
02/01/2016 at 06:47 AM
