[eDebate] irrelevant NON-replies
MIDNBRUNO at aol.com
Mon Mar 24 19:12:18 CST 2003
I won't get into too many of the substantive portions of this post, but I
will respond to the following:
> >> 1) Broadcasting POW's isn't necessarily a violation of the Geneva
>> Convention, however their treatment in this broadcast was.
> the protest from washington involved the broadcast, not the treatment.
Actually, the "protest" as you refer to it, is to both the broadcast and the
treatment. I am by no means taking a stance on the invasion. However, the
broadcast violation of the Geneva convention is due to the illegality of both
humiliating POW's and interrogating them in front of the media. The
treatment part that we are objecting to is that many news sources are
reporting that a few of the people appear to have execution style wounds
(center of forehead, single shot type stuff) which would be an obvious
violation of the Geneva Convention.
US Navy (for 84 more Days that is)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Mailman