1937- WAR CRIMES AND OTHER STUFF.
In the aftermath of the Benghazi
debacle [the U.S. putting an embassy in the middle of an unsecured area- with
known militants roaming the land- and then pulling out their security]. There
were voices [including the president] that condemned the killing of the
ambassador as acts of terror- or on the same grounds as a war crime.
The president used language like
‘bring them to justice’.
When one nation declares war on
another [or in this case- a specific group- Al Qaeda]- then the killing of
actual representatives of the other side- when that side is dumb enough to
plant them like sitting ducks- is actually considered a legitimate military
target [compared to the killing of an ordinary citizen who holds no official
capacity].
Now- before I lose my
conservative readers- listen clearly.
I of course condemn the killing
of ambassador Stevens- and the 3 other Americans.
After watching/reading the
stories about this incident over the past couple of weeks- I fault the U.S. administration
for failing to properly protect the area.
We now know that that the U.S.
watched the attack unfold- over a period of 7-8 hours- and did nothing.
There are conflicting stories-
our people on the ground said they requested help- multiple times.
They said that help was denied.
We had a brave young Navy seal
who took it upon himself to try and save the ambassador- he was killed in the
attempt.
And we had the president say-
that as soon as he heard of the attack- he immediately made ‘the call’ to
increase security around the world- and start the steps to bring the attackers
‘to justice’.
What our guys needed was ‘real
time’ help- we had a drone filming the thing- some possibly armed- and we
watched our guys get killed for 7 hours- and did nothing.
Now- this was a debacle in no
uncertain terms- and the loss of our guys is tragic.
But- when you declare war- and
put an official representative of the opposing side smack dab in the middle of those
we declared war on- what the ‘heck’ do we expect?
War crimes.
Right now in the media- this term
is often used against those we deem ready for removal.
It makes no difference to us
whether the side doing the removal are Al Qaeda- we simply refer to the leaders
as having committed ‘war crimes’ or ‘crimes against humanity’.
We did this with Gadhaffi- doing
it with Assad [Syria] and will probably keep doing it from now on.
When you see one side as having
committed ‘crimes against humanity’ in general- then it justifies the other
side- no matter how bad they are.
The whole concept of holding
people responsible for war crimes arose after world war 1- yet it wasn’t until
WW2 that we really had the concept down.
After the war was over- there
were trials held in Germany- the most famous being Nuremburg- and we tried the
German military men who committed ‘war crimes’.
Some of the criteria for a war
crime simply said ‘if the losing side did it- and the winning side did not-
then that’s a war crime’.
Sounds a little like Jeff
Foxworthy type stuff.
But this is true- some of the
German submarine captains actually used as there defense- that the allies [our
side] did the same thing- and that was enough to say ‘okay- not a war crime’.
As you can see- war crimes- or
‘crimes against humanity’ are in the eye of the beholder.
Now- in the entire history of the
world- the biggest one [or 2] day killing of civilians- that is a targeting of civilians
for a military/political goal- was the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Yes- out of all the nations on
the planet- the U.S. killed more civilians- on purpose- in these 2 attacks-
then in any other single bombing in history.
We had our reasons for sure- but
the immediate deaths were around 200 thousand- not counting the many women and children
who died many years later- from the long tortuous process of radiation cancer.
These types of deaths- especially
on many of the thousands of young kids who suffered extreme agony- great fear
in their deaths- were not considered ‘crimes against humans’.
Yet- the water boarding of a terrorist-
an actual enemy who is in our custody- is considered tortuous- and meets the
criteria of a war crime.
See how messed up this is?
Now- in the past 2 years the U.S.
has worked closely with the state of Israel in monitoring/spying on Iran- to
see how far along they are coming with their nuclear program.
We share intelligence- and have
even ‘partnered’ with them in some clandestine op’s.
The famous Stuxnet virus- a
computer virus that was launched to disable Iran’s nuclear reactors- was a
joint program between the U.S. and Israel.
Okay- one of the other secret
operations that has been going on is the killing of civilian scientists who are
working with Iran’s nuclear program.
These scientists are not military
targets- they are civilians- who are deemed ‘worthy’ targets because of their
role in the nuclear program.
I have heard no one call these
killings ‘crimes against humans’ or ‘war crimes’ even though these scientists
are civilians.
No- in the reports about their
killings- there is a sense of ‘hooray’.
In the past 3 years there has
been a collection of various bomb parts- dropped by the U.S. - in the mountainous
region between Afghanistan and Pakistan.
There are legal teams on the
ground- representing the families of kids and women who have been killed by our
nonstop use of Drones in the area.
We- the U.S.- have a military
objective- to root out the Taliban [who were ‘created’ by the U.S. govt. when
we aided them against the Russians]. In the process of this rooting out- we
have killed- and keep on killing- Muslim women and kids.
Now- do we ‘mean’ to kill them?
Of course not.
But we are making the military/political
calculation that so many kids and women will indeed be killed- we know this.
So- we are basically saying
‘look- we really don’t want to kill these kids- but this does happen from time
to time’.
Can we help it?
Of course- stop using the ‘darn’
drones- solved.
The whole point I’m making in
this post is we- the citizens of the world- are often manipulated by the way a
story is told- by the way the media show us stuff.
I know of no U.S. citizen who
even thinks twice about calling the killing of the Japanese- and thousands of
kids- with radiation poisoning- a very tortuous death- a war crime.
Yet many see the water boarding
of a terrorist as a war crime.
Does this make any sense at all?
All killing- all war- is wrong.
What?
You mean our response to 9-11 is
wrong?
I mean that when humans resort to
killing other humans- because they see no other way to resolve the problem-
then it’s wrong.
I don’t like hearing the words
‘this guy committed a crime against humans’.
When you put a bullet in another
human- and kill that person- it is never a just act- not in my book.
Yes- there are people who have
committed terrible crimes- and I- like everybody else- also think ‘that so and
so needs to die’.
But as a society- we should be
able to deal with them [life without ever getting out] without having to kill
them.
Over the next few weeks we will
see the outcome of what really happened in Libya- but when I hear words like
‘we will bring them to justice’.
I don’t truly get it- if we [the
U.S.] declare war on a group- we then need to be more responsible about where
we put official rep’s of the U.S.
Our official Rep’s are deemed ‘justified’
targets- they represent the U.S. govt. in an official capacity.
The U.S. needs to respond to attacks
on them as an act of war.
I heard Leon Panetta say ‘we
couldn’t put our troops at risk in an unknown situation’.
No- you say that if it’s some
type of rescue operation of non U.S. citizens- but when it’s an attack by those
we have declared war on- and they are attacking our official U.S. rep on the
ground- no- we do indeed put our troops at risk to go in and do what needs to
be done.
That’s war.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John. Don’t forget to scroll down on the timeline [Facebook] -
I have posted lots.
No comments:
Post a Comment