Sounds like Helms thinks the Geneva Conventions are ‘quaint’, too.

I think we may not be able to rely on our military for a long, long time. It’s going to have to be cleaned out and rebuilt from both ends.

Do they still believe that they’re protecting and serving the Constitution and the laws, or is it all for the President in their minds?

For two (or is it three now?) years now this never leaves me. I am an officer reservist in the Air Force. While serving my weekend duty period we had to go to our annual LOAC briefing (Law of Armed Conflict). Normally, the brief is actually the watching of a nicely made video from the JAG’s office in the Pentagon. It goes over the Law of War, Geneva Conventions, the rules in dealing with prisoners, what is and isn’t a valid target, etc. This time, however, there was no video. Our local JAG officer gave the brief…and I will NEVER forget it.

He presented a rather off-the-cuff briefing (brief indeed) about LOAC and breezed over the Geneva Conventions and rules of dealing with prisoners and enemy combatants. While doing this he commented that these rules really don’t apply to the insurgents in Iraq (in a joking, light-hearted manner as if the very idea of using Geneva-friendly rules of conduct was a joke). I was stunned by this. I remain stunned, disheartened, and totally demoralized by this. It hasn’t left me and never will.

There is no wonder that the Marines in Fallujah went “wilding” on the Iraqis there. I cannot imagine that the Marine JAGs (and other leadership) were any less dismissive of LOAC than our own JAG officer was. Quaint indeed.

Since that performance, I have been waiting for an opportunity to attend another such briefing to see if there is a repeat performance (we sometimes get the brief via online training which covers the rules clearly, boringly, and very dispassionately which is certainly better than that last “live” brief). I was too stunned, too shocked to say anything last time but if I get a repeat I WILL respond. There is MORE here than simply the Geneva Conventions. Besides the UCMJ itself, there is also the Conventions Against Torture, Abuse, and Inhumane Treatment which leave NO “wiggle room” because it applies to anyone and everyone, legal or “illegal” combatant or not.

Maybe that’s why the Iraqis are now encouraged to get their own guns. I don’t see how arming themselves helps them against US military during a search of their home.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..0709/iraq/

There are videos of what Iraq looks like today compared to what it looked like 5 years ago. In the end, it won’t matter that we did not “bomb them to the stone age” as radio wingnuts were shouting in 2003.
We are the bad guys no matter what world issue you look at.

We know at some point Israel will have to face what it thus far has chosen very much to avoid.
That will be to accept the existence of Arab Palestine and to pull back to the 1967 lines and return of East Jerusalem to Arab Palestine.
This must happen.Will happen.Only question still being whether sooner or later?
What is the alternative?
What does it look like?
More Israeli brutality against Arab Palestine? Increased expungement of Arab Palestine? Killing off the Arabs until they are all dead or have become refugees?
Is this what Israel intends to do?
The Americans have very stupidly allowed Israel to run with a Israeli version of the GWOT that fully is intended to cloak Israeli land grabs,repressive police state conduct and expungement of Arab Palestine with an avalanche of Israeli rulemaking,permit games,visa/passport games,property rights abuse and unilateral takings,terrorist branding,political snuff outs and cultural demolition of Arab Palestine.
Obviously they know G.W.Bush is quite ignorant and have gamed that ignorance repeatedly.
Israeli zealots seek what will only bring the worst of outcomes on all of Israel.
American occupation conduct in Iraq is being modeled on Israeli tactics and methods.
Eventually the truth which surely is known well enough in Iraq already by many,many Iraqis will find its way back to more and more Americans in the USA with passage of time.
It very likely will be an account of brazen occupation law breaks,sordidness and craven lack of mercy or better instincts of martial conduct.
With the worst of brutal,punitive storytells and multiple brutality examples and instances coming to the light of day when finally able.
The Americans are surely leaving a tragic trail of wanton conduct,cultural ignorance and many examples of war crimes for the Arab world to fully see up close and remember.
When this Iraq Occupation by Americans is fully documented in all ways not currently possible the USA will not come out of it as having acted/been very noble.
The Americans are not the good guys in Iraq.

james @ 83

where are you talking about james?

Arc Lights strikes left huge, huge craters, and shook the ground for miles around. From bomb damage assessments I was on the payload was HE, massive amounts of HE. The tell-tale petrol smell of napalm wasn’t there and the ground wasn’t normally scorched.

There also weren’t many human remnants left.

I’m talking about Vietnam along the Ho Chi Minh Trail, in the lingo of the government in the citations that accompanied medals given for service in that area “west of Danang.” Any citations received for actions taken by Marines in Laos were designated west of Danang.

We had to do BDAs to determine if whatever they had been after was destroyed and to gather evidence, if we could find any, of which units might be operating in the area, and yeah, arc light runs left huge craters, splintered trees, leveled ground, and if there had been any NVA concentrated in the area, very little evidence if they’d been there or not.

wgg: tokin lib’rul @ 132

Puff was a C-47 w/a coupla vulcan mini-cannons, one port, the other starboard…

C-130s in nam were called ’spookies’…nowadays, “spectre”
same armaments, though: vulcan 20mm mini-cannon, 6000 rounds per minute…sounds like a card-sharp shuffling

I agree with the armament utilized, I’ve fired vulcans personally! However, I’ve never heard of C-47’s being utilized, from individuals whom served in Nam, personally told me they were all AC-130’s!!! AC is the proper nomenclature of those flying lethal behemoths!!!

I can’t sleep through the night these days….

All I know about the gunships, aside from Cobras and Hueys, is that when we called for close support in a hot situation we could count on the bad guys getting creamed just about right next to us. In many extraction situations, we’d give the crews in the planes our locations and they’d lay down blistering fire, I mean like bullets being sprayed from a garden hose.

Puff and Spooky lierally saved my ass on more than one occasion out in Happy Valley and the Tennis Courts along with the Marines flying with the Hostage call signs in the OV-10 Broncos.

I owe a lot of guys a few tequila shots!!

Big Mitch @ 230

Occupation is a term with legal significance. It does not fit the facts of this case.

That is specious. An occupation is not an occupation because the fact that it is embarrasses you? This is not an argument. Military control of an area for 40 years is an occupation. This appeal to some kind of legalistic sleight of hand redefinition is silly. What should we call it? A picnic? A field trip that got out of hand?

Words have meaning. You cn call this a legalistic sleight of hand, but when you do so you undermine the rule of law. An “occupation” occurs when one country invades another, controls territory and the other country seeks to re-gain control of the territory it lost. The U.S. occupied Germany after world war II, but never sought permanent annexation.

Under the Geneva Accords, the status of an occupier imposes legal obligations. If Israel were to undertake those obligations, all hell would break loose, because the Palestineans would never relinquish peacefully the measure of control necessary to fulfill those obligations.

It’s important to recognize that the US is very closely following Israeli tactics in the occupation of Iraq. And those tactics – by either Israel or the US are illegal under international law and conventions … and in the US, under our own laws.

The protection of civilians, no torture, no bombing of civilian neighborhoods, use of chemical warfare, etc … these are illegal. It’s quite simple really.

I have to agree. I am a strong supporter of Israel (in the sense of their right to exist), but their conduct in the occupied territories is completely out of bounds and frankly counterproductive. Israeli policies (including support for the settlements on Palestinian lands, excessive force, the wall, etc.) establish the environment which allows and encourages Hamas and Hezbollah to flourish.

Ed*ard Teller @ 232

GordonM – used to read your blog daily, and can’t begin to fathom why I stopped. This was like three years ago, and two computers ago. I just put the bookmark on this machine. You’re great!

No, that wasn’t me. 3 years ago I was fighting lawyers and creditors and still trying to prop up my dying career. My agonist diary pretty much marks my return to something resembling sanity ;-).

bookmark stays. good stuff…