![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 7 of 7. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Racer on March 11, 2005, at 16:45:37
Does anyone here know, off hand, if the US has ever ratified the Geneva Conventions? Just suddenly curious about it...
Posted by gromit on March 11, 2005, at 18:27:47
In reply to 1925 Geneva Convention -- anyone know..., posted by Racer on March 11, 2005, at 16:45:37
I don't know but we sure are violating the provisions that pertain to the humane treatment of enemy combatants. Especially in Afghanistan we labeled anyone who dared to shoot back at us a terrorist. I'll resist another rant on the so called "Patriot Act".
Arghhh,
Rick
Posted by TofuEmmy on March 11, 2005, at 22:55:29
In reply to 1925 Geneva Convention -- anyone know..., posted by Racer on March 11, 2005, at 16:45:37
I think you are asking about the Geneva Gas Protocol which is part of the Geneva Conventions, right?
The answer appears to be yes, sorta of...
"The 1925 Geneva Gas Protocol for the Prohibition of the use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or Other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare ("the 1925 Gas Protocol") is the principal international agreement in force relating to the regulation of chemical weapons in armed conflict."
"The United States is a party to the 1925 Gas Protocol, as are all other NATO nations and all former Warsaw Pact nations. The United States, the U.S.S.R., and most other NATO and Warsaw Pact nations conditioned their adherence to the 1925 Gas Protocol on the understanding that the prohibition against use of chemical weapons ceases to be binding with respect to nations whose armed forces, or the armed forces of their allies, fail to respect that prohibition. This, in effect, restricted the prohibition to the "first use" of such munitions, with parties to the Protocol reserving the right to employ chemical weapons for retaliatory purposes."
From this site:
Posted by jay on March 13, 2005, at 12:50:29
In reply to 1925 Geneva Convention -- anyone know..., posted by Racer on March 11, 2005, at 16:45:37
> Does anyone here know, off hand, if the US has ever ratified the Geneva Conventions? Just suddenly curious about it...
>
>Yes the U.S. did, and in reference to Afghanistan, etc, they got around the protocols by labeling people "enemy combatents", rather than "Prisoner's Of War". Most International politics experts think this an abuse of the GC, and outright disagree with the U.S. move. Does the U.S. care, though?...hmmm
Jay
Posted by gromit on March 14, 2005, at 15:18:06
In reply to Re: 1925 Geneva Convention -- anyone know... » Racer, posted by jay on March 13, 2005, at 12:50:29
> Most International politics experts think this an abuse of the GC, and outright disagree with the U.S. move. Does the U.S. care, though?...hmmm
I don't think it's a matter of caring, this administration is so focused on the "war on terror" they just don't see the bigger picture. If you're talking about the general population they happily accept whatever the media feeds them for the most part. They're more likely to vote for the next American Idol than the next President. Enemy Combatant vs POW, arghhh. What is a POW except someone you've captured that was willing to fight back? I guess it depends on your definition of "is", sorry that makes no sense but somehow I couldn't resist.
I could go on but it's hard to find someone who disagrees here.
Rick
Posted by TofuEmmy on March 15, 2005, at 10:20:30
In reply to 1925 Geneva Convention -- anyone know..., posted by Racer on March 11, 2005, at 16:45:37
What I find interesting is the idea that if another country breaks the protocol, or has not signed it...and they use gas - then we can too. So a heinous act is peachy keen, as long we don't do it first. Wow. (After we use the gas, do we then say "Nyah, nyah!"?)
Doesn't this sound simlar to the US's continued support for the death penalty? One crime deserves another, eh?
em
Posted by so on May 20, 2005, at 0:45:41
In reply to Re: Geneva Gas Protocol, posted by TofuEmmy on March 15, 2005, at 10:20:30
> What I find interesting is the idea that if another country breaks the protocol, or has not signed it...and they use gas - then we can too. So a heinous act is peachy keen, as long we don't do it first. Wow. (After we use the gas, do we then say "Nyah, nyah!"?)
>
> Doesn't this sound simlar to the US's continued support for the death penalty? One crime deserves another, eh?
Children died of cyanitic gas poisoning during a US government gas attack at Waco, Texas in 1993. Government officials blocked firefighters from entering the area with equipment that could have stopped the burning CS gas from creating cyanide gas. Even had not the flamable CS aerosol caught fire creating lethal cyanide gasses, quantities pumped into the contained area could have been fatal to any children who were not evacuated from the building. Officials claimed they initiated the attack to protect the children from abuse.It's probably beside the point, however. Geneva Conventions don't apply to domestic matters.
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Politics | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.