The jihadis continue to violate the laws of warfare. In Ramadi, insurgents used a school as an ammunitions depot. In Haditha, the “minutemen” used a mosque as a firing point and a shrine to store various weapons. CNN producer Arwa Damon, who is embedded with the 3rd Battalion 1st Marines, reports:
According to Capt. James Kimber, commander of India Company, the route in front of the mosque was being swept for mines when the unit was hit by an IED. Soldiers were unhurt and discovered a second IED with a detonation cord leading to the mosque. Iraqi Special Forces searched the mosque, but found nothing. The unit hit by the IED reported seeing a male fleeing from the scene. Two homes were searched; nine males were detained and then released.
Adjacent to the mosque is the crumbling shrine of Sheik Ahmad Rifa and a small graveyard. From two large blue plastic tubs Marines pulled out explosives including rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs), bomb-making materials and grenades. Hidden underneath the crumbling rubble of the graveyard and the rock-filled garden surrounding the shrine, Marines found 16 155mm artillery shells, about half of which were already rigged with detonation cord. Buried in the catacombs of the shrine, they found more RPG rounds, RPGs, and AK-47 assault rifles.
Iraqi Army troops cleared the surrounding buildings. The three men in the mosque denied any knowledge of the insurgent’s activities, despite the massive amounts of ordinance discovered. Captain Jeffrey Pool inventories the mosque weapons cache:
(2000 meters) Wire and bomb making materials such as blasting caps and remote explosive detonation devices; (4) RPG launcher and (26) grenades; (9) sticks of TNT; (2) incendiary rounds; (1) 155mm round pre-wired for use as a roadside bomb; (3) 120mm round pre-wired for use as a roadside bomb; (11) 130mm rounds pre-wired for use as a roadside bomb; (5) Hand grenades pre-wired for use as a roadside bomb; (1) 75mm round; Hand grenades; More than 1,000 rounds of ammunition; (2) bullet proof vests.
The Geneva Convention explicitly states the usage of places of worship to support the war effort is illegal:
Art. 53. Protection of cultural objects and of places of worship
Without prejudice to the provisions of the Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict of 14 May 1954, and of other relevant international instruments, it is prohibited: (a) to commit any acts of hostility directed against the historic monuments, works of art or places of worship which constitute the cultural or spiritual heritage of peoples; (b) to use such objects in support of the military effort; (c) to make such objects the object of reprisals. (Protocol I, Art. 53)
Yet the media never questions the insurgency’s usage of places of worship to fire on Coalition troops, act as weapons depots and torture their enemies. In fact, the Ms. Damon never mentions the Geneva Conventions once in the entire report. This is a clear violation of the laws of war by an enemy that repeatedly and intentionally violates these rules as a matter of practice. It seems the phrase “Geneva Convention” can only be preceded by “Abu Ghraib” or “Gitmo”.
26 Comments
Charles Johnson at Little Green Footballs once asked, “If the mainstream media were actively supporting the terrorists in Iraq and trying to undermine the Coalition, how would their coverage differ from what they’re putting out today?”
Who knew that so many supposedly intelligent, educated, decent, CIVILIZED people would willingly take the side of inhuman savages just for political purposes?
The ghastly irony of it all, of course, is that the George W. Bush who they hate so much doesn’t even exist. He’s a figment of their sick imaginations.
Neither Al Qaeda nor the Baath Party in Iraq are signatories to the Geneva Convention. There is no reason to expect them to even know of its contents.
This is not a war against a nation state.
Thats right Don. And if you want to get all technical about it, I believe that signataries (sp?) to the convention are not obligated to observe the rules of the convention towards those who are not.
Doooh. “signatories”
how about a breakthrough moment? don cox, why don’t you explain – as best you can – what motivated your post above ?
you see, those of us who didn’t need peterargus’s clarification often wonder what drives those like you that did. was it that difficult for you to figure it out for yourself? do you have a reading impairment wrt the Geneva Conventions? If not, what was the cause?
ex-democrat,
Can we leave personal attacks out of the conversation please. They don’t further the discussion.
I think the main point here is we never hear about the Geneva conventions unless somehow we can be guilty of breaking them. This is just another example of how our press is being manipulated by our sworn and declared enemy. A press like that is activly working for the other side.
Jim is 100% correct.
As is Soldier’s Dad. Let’s discuss the issues, and leave the personal attacks out of the discussion.
This whole posting is very hypocritical. The same people who are against any rules for interrograting detainees are the same people who are complaining that insurgents are not following the Geneva Conventions. If we want to show that we indeed have the moral high ground, we have to be MORE moral and MORE decent than our enemies. Anybody who does not agree with stopping all forms of torture on detainees has absolutely no right to complain about violations of the Geneva Convetion by others.
And what do you know about my position on torture, VU? What happened at Abu Ghraib was wrong. I declared as such on day one. (I’ll let you dig up the post). Abu Ghraib came to light because of investigations by our military, not because of the investigative reporting of Sly Hersch. Where is our enemy’s morale compass?
What is happening in the mosques and schools is also wrong. Where is the media outrage over this? Why is the Geneva Conventions never even mentioned in these stories? You don’t detect the slightest hint of a double standard here? Don’t you see how the media is playing to the enemy’s propaganda by framing Abu Ghraib in terms of Geneva, while framing the hundreds of incidents of violations by the “militants” as standard operating procedure? This doesn’t concern you in the least?
vucommodore,
Geneva Convention ’49 covers “uniformed” combatants. The theory behind it was that in exchange for wearing a uniform ,only marked vehicles and avoiding the use of certain protected places, the combatants would be granted fair and humane treatment in the event they were captured, and unless guilty of some war crime, released at the end of hostilities.
The intent was to minimize the impact of warfare on civilian populations.
I.E. Honorable men fight in uniforms,placing themselves at a severe disadvantage to dishonorable men, who do not fight in uniforms. Hence, honorable men should receive “honorable” treatment.
Without a difference in “treatment” accorded to prisoners, what would motivate someone to “wear a uniform”. Wearing a uniform, and using marked vehicles is a disadvantage in warfare.
Bill:
I wasn’t talking about you in particular. However, in the last thread, there were a couple individuals expressing outrage at McCain’s bill to outline how detainees are to be treated. It also cannot be ignored that the War in Iraq period was a violation of International Law which states that one state cannot invade another sovereign state.
I realize that insurgents are breaking the Laws of War. Most other people realize this too. Human Rights Watch recently said they were worried about serious “war crimes” being committed in Iraq by insurgents. Using mosques and schools is the tip of the iceberg. The most serious violation of the rules of war that insurgents are committing is terrorism against civilians. That is much worse than using mosques and schools to store weapons.
“This whole posting is very hypocritical.” – VU
Well, at least you have that correct but not in the way you intentioned VU.
The post is spot on. We ARE holding the higher moral ground even though WE DO NOT HAVE TO. Period. Yet our media acts as though we must absolutely sacrifice lives to prove we are scum. Our Congress has decided to act on something that is not required of them in order to place further restrictions on our facing an enemy of unbelievable cruelty and dishonor. Again, it is us that is restricted. And the media continues their assault of the “right” of our actions. They only come out of the bars in the Green Zone of they sniff a chance to “catch” our military doing something that is not only not illegal but generally something needed to save lives.
So you propose the same VU? You propose to have our men and women die because of your idea of what is high moral ground? Yeah, but you support the troops we know. I agree with your hypocritical statement 100%.
Look, there are no “rules” governing fighting terrorists other than those we self-impose. When the terrorists rip open the stomach of a 5 yr old, pack him with explosives, and roll him into the street to draw in Marines that is simply part of “insurgent tactics”. Fair tactics right VU? Nothing is reported other than some a*shat gets roughed up for trying to kill our troops in this manner. The media presents us as the bad guys and the tactics used by the terrorits get a free pass. Yeah VU, hypocritical is a good word. Were it you dealing with the type of cowards our boys face. Then just perhaps you might see the real, and extremely dangerous, behavior of the media for what it truly is. Support for our enemy.
Pardon me if I’m testy. But then I get to honor the death of a young man that put his feet many a time under our table. Killed by an attack that violates everything known to pertain to morality in warfare. And then enjoy your view on how it was his fault. I get the pleasure on knowing my son is carrying on after the death of members of his platoon, boys he went to Boot with, boys he deployed three times with, so they can be charged with not taking your proverbial “higher moral ground” VU. And you wonder why some of us have no patience with people of your viewpoint? Frankly, we just don’t give a da*n what you think! But we “hear” you VU and we “understand”. The media is shaping public opinion while relating only a very, very small portion of the truth and dupes like you carry on the mantra. Thank you for your support.
Sorry Bill. I’m just over it!
soldier’s dad & bill: as it is bill’s blog, i will desist from commenting any further (and go back to avidly reading).
however, i do not agree at all with the point you make here. a personal attack might be “what the hell do you know, you never went to college!” Mine was not of that ilk, but was an attempt to go from defense to offense in dealing with the incredibly important issue of useful idiot-ism.
this war is being fought as much here in the homeland as abroad. and those who undermine the effort need to be defeated as well. whether those bringing aid and comfort to our enemies are sincere but misguided (‘useful idiots’) or reckless seditionists and opportunistic pot-shot artists is of great significance. Indeed, i suspect Mr. Cox is oblivious to the mental process that led him to short-circuit his own intellect in favor of an attempted cheap shot. Wilful ignorance always has an explanation. i’d have thought this blog, post 9/11, would have figured out that in virtually all things offense is the best form of defense.
I cut my self off before I was finished! heh! Blame it on senility.
Which “International Law” was violated in our strike of Iraq VU. Give me chapter and verse please. While you are doing your research I would also like you to give me chapter and verse on the “Internationa Laws” that were violated by Hussein. Add to it the resolutions giving the US the legal where-with-all to invade Iraq. Enough of this buying the media and leftist agenda lock, stock, and barrel VU. Do your homework and get back to me.
Read Yon’s latest dispatch as well. He does an excellent job of putting the media connection together with the events through Mosul.
http://michaelyon.blogspot.com/
Aw, what difference does it make. No one is going to change their mind even when slapped upside the head with provable fact. Your hatred of anything Bush and the leftist/media hatred of anything America is too firmly planted so as to have become entrenched in the very fabric of your thinking VU. But at least you can feel comfort in the fact that you are not alone in your lunacy. The mantra of defeatism has ensconced the entire left side of the political spectrum while giving free passes to our enemies and those administrations that went before that brought us to this point.
Must be nice to view the world through such strict interpretation. Avoiding the sheer significance of the very danger that threatens your way of life and the lifeblood of the Republic. Were it so that I could forget our obligations to make sure the Country survives over the idiocy of a percentage of our own population. I could just imagine the rest and relief afforded by such a view of absolute certainty!
Here’s hoping you will never have to face the terror that is being faced on your behalf while constantly being lied about, chastized, and hampered to the point of survival at every turn! Good luck!
If you’re relying on ‘International Law’ to invalidate the Iraq War, then the 14+ different reasons for going to war all irrelevant but one.
We were following UN directives prior to invading – and our vehicles and personnel were shot at by Iraqi military. Acts of war are, surprisingly enough, sufficient for a war. Pretty simple.
(Very dumb as a sole reason, but ass-covering pretexts are easy to find.)
VUcommodre: It also cannot be ignored that the War in Iraq period was a violation of International Law which states that one state cannot invade another sovereign state.
Well, last time I checked in March 2003, the Iraqi people had absolutely no sovereignty. Iraq was NOT a sovereign state. There were no elections under Saddam, and he was the absolute dictator of all of Iraq for 26 years, and had killed 300,000 Iraqis (UN figure) simply because they opposed him. Sort of like Bush sending the State Police to kill Democrats and reactionary-leftists who do not like Bush.
And you call this sovereignty of Iraqis?
Sovereignty belongs to the people and not to the rulers or to the territory, land, trees or rocks.
You need to brush up on your Political Science.
Hypothetically speaking of course, if the media wanted citizens of the U.S. to weary of the war would:
1: Focus on each and every bombing as if the detonation of a bomb itself is “success”; Security is defined as total elimination of violence = virtually an impossibility, thus success will never be reached.
2: Focus on the death of each and every Marine, Sailor or soldier
3: Ignore success on the battlefield.
4: Fail to report the “strategy” going on in the Anbar region; instead report political statements claiming there is no strategy.
5: Fail to report on the killing of children, why not show pictures of dead children as well as abused detainees.
6. Report that the enemy takes no prisoners, beheads, tortures, disembowels, or immediately kill any enemy captured to put into perspective the actions of Americans.
7.Report that Islamo-Facists use their own mosques to store weapons and hide terrorists.
8. Fail to call Zarquawi a “terrorist”; instead refer to him as a “insurgent”…Check out Friday’s NYTimes.
ex-democrat,
No one is asking you to quit posting here. Please do not refrain from doing so.
I know this can be a heated topic and was attempting to let the commenters know that I want the issues discussed and personal attacks kept out of it.
jarheaddad,
I’m sorry for your loss. Don’t apologize, you’ve earned a free pass from me today, considering the circumstances. Now go take care of that Marine’s family as best you can.
Jarhead Dad,
I understand. Those media idiots make you want to kill them, but we are trained to protect. Damn, but it is so hard sometimes!
In Iraq, Afghanistan and several other places our troops and our leaders are doing something very necessary and very difficult. The necessary part is fighting a war to protect our country. The difficult part is that they are fighting the war in the most humane and most decent manner that a war can be fought, and perhaps has ever been fought in history.
Some mistakes are made, but they are few and far between, and the mistakes are addressed and corrected, as best as a mistake in war can ever be corrected. A mistake is not the same as a deliberately barbaric act.
Barbarism is not, and has not ever been, our policy. Any who say otherwise are liars.
It is indisputable that barbarism is the policy of our enemy.
Our enemy started this war with barbaric acts in Lebanon, in Kuiwait, in New York in 1993 and 2001, in Washington, D.C., in Yemen, in Saudi Arabia, in Madrid, in Kenya, in London, in Indonisia, in Thailand, and in the Phillipines. They have broken their solemn undertakings. They have killed civilians on the high seas. Our enemy has attempted to kill our former President. They reward the families of suicide murderers of civilian woman and children. They have used weapons of mass destruction against their own people and another country. If these acts are not barbarism, nothing is.
Our troops are not confronting an abstract idea. They are confronting evil.
And the evil confronting our troops is being supported by the newsrooms of America and Western Europe and by the opportunist left.
the western media and the the opportunists of the left have shamefully forgotten the reality of totalitarianism and the viciousness of fascism. The western media and the opportunists of the left use their rights as a sword to subvert the defense of our country. The western media and the opportunists of the left attack the morale of our troops indirectly by sapping the will of the families of the troops. The daily casualty count is a twisted knife in the hearts of the families of our troops. And if none of ours are killed, they make the news ambiguous, so there is no relief unless further inquiry is made. It is a cruel and vicious attack on those who stay at home. And it is equally cruel and vicious to our troops, who have more than enough to worry about.
The western media and opportunists of the left think they feel good, they are superior, any who disagree are stupid. In fact they are drunkenly wandering in a quagmire of their own hotel bound lies. They cannot see the hangover that will be theirs. The media and the opportunists of the left are lost in a cesspool of self satisfied, pompous, egotistical and really dumb abstract moralisms.
Stop purchasing troop baiting media, stop consuming troop baiting media products, do not vote for those who undermine our troops, and the families of our troops, again, ever. It is your right to do this. It is your right to remember those who support fascism.
That is the only way to punish the enemies of our troops in the western media and the opportuniustic left for their support of this fascist evil.
Bill writes:
The difficult part is that they are fighting the war in the most humane and most decent manner that a war can be fought, and perhaps has ever been fought in history.
I reply:
Wars that are fought in a “humane” manner are rarely, if ever, won.
In fact the term: “fighting humanely” is an oxymoron.
We were NOT humane in WWII, and we won. We nuked two cities in Japan. We destroyed many churces in Europe when dropping bombs on cities. We roasted Japanese soldiers with flame throwers.
Oh, but NOW we protect mosques. What is the logic in that? Political correctness in the Pentagon is the answer (which means, self-defeating illogic).
The asshat policies we are following now — of hand-cuffing our troops and sacrificing them in needless hand-to-hand combat when we could drop napalm instead, are simply inexcusable.
Putting panties on heads of naked prisoners in Abu Ghraib is child’s play. Imprisoning Lynndie England for such antics was a travesty.
Let’s get real, shall we, gentlemen?
Let’s find the (uncovered-by-Geneva-Conventions) enemy and kill him.
I truly wish Bush would FIRE a few politically correct Generals and get some ass-kickers in there.
Of course, Bush needs to get his head out of the sand, first. For the FIRST time since 9-11, he ONLY this past week brought himself to say the word “Islamofascists” publicy for the first time. Talk about taking your time to get the picture!
Too bad that Bush/Rumsfeld have forgotten THEIR OWN winning formula of “shock and awe”. Their amnesia has cost us men’s lives.
As far as collaborating members of the media (in the theater of operations) are concerned, they should be treated as hostile combatants — and shot accordingly. (Fortunately, a few already have been.)
Correction: “rich” (post #21) — and NOT “Bill” wrote the sentence I quoted at the opening of my post (#22) above.
My error completely, for which I apologize.
Minutemen, Mosques and the Geneva Convention is an excellent, factual, and well-researched post.
However, I hold the White House/Pentagon responsible for having allowed themselves to be cowed by a seditious media into forcing our men to abide by the “Geneva conventions” when fighting throat-slitting terrorists who have NO REGARD for such conventions. That isn’t wisdom or high-mindedness: It is sheer idiocy.
Let’s throw out the Marquis de Queensbury Rules and get on with the dirty work of rousting, capturing, severely interrogating, and/or killing the enemy abroad and racially profiling and closing our borders at home.
We are at war: Time to fight LIKE WE MEAN IT!
If we don’t have the WILL to WIN, then we might as well sign up for Dhimmi status now and get it over with.
vucommodore’s concern for Iraqi sovereignty is touching. Would he have been as concerned for Germany in 1940/41? Germany never attacked us, yet FDR fought what ammounted to a secret war in the Atlantic against Germany in 1940/41 (pre Dec 7). He gave secret orders to the Navy to shoot on sight German U-Boats. Yet we were not at war with Germany. Further, American public opinion was 80-90% against our aiding the UK, having felt burned by our participating in WWI (Nye commission and all that).
Even after Hitler up and declared war on us, could we not have offered to negotiate?
P.S. The Axis treaty between Germany, Japan, and Italy was defensive in nature, and thus only obliged signatories to come to the aid of other countries if they were attacked. Since Japan attacked us, Germany was under no obligation to aid Japan.