Another black eye for your recent insane bull sh*t ranting
In Response to Paris, Ted Cruz Calls for
Airstrikes With More ‘Tolerance for Civilian Casualties’
Ted
Cruz already knows the solution in the aftermath of the Paris attacks: “A
bombing campaign that’s not afraid to kill innocent civilians,” he says in part:
“We
must immediately recognize that our enemy is not “violent extremism.” It is the
“radical Islamism” that has declared Jihad against the west. It will not be
appeased by outreach or declarations of tolerance. It will not be
deterred by targeted airstrikes with zero tolerance for civilian casualties,
when the terrorists have such utter disregard for innocent life.”
Sen. Cruz, listen up — call this your hour of education update: What you propose is illegal, unlawful and a war crime and that is not America.
The “concept of immunity, that is the rule
that certain people and places should be protected and respected” during
wartime, can be dated back at least to 1582, when a Spanish judge suggested
that “intentional killing of innocent persons, for example, women and children,
is not allowable in war.”
The Geneva Conventions of 1949 confirmed
immunity for civilians, hospitals, and medical staff
The 1977 Additional Protocols to the
conventions state: “The civilian population and individual civilians shall
enjoy general protection against the dangers arising from military operations.”
The absolute rule is that civilians must
not be directly targeted for military attack.
Furthermore, some individuals
considered especially vulnerable: children under fifteen, the elderly, pregnant
women, and mothers of children under seven for example, are granted special
protection and may be moved to safe zones exempt from attack by agreement of
the warring parties. The wounded, sick, or shipwrecked, military personnel who
are considered to be hors de combat (not inside, but away from combat,
etc.), are also protected, as are POW’s.
Hospitals, both fixed and mobile,
ambulances, hospital ships, medical aircraft, and medical personnel — whether
civilian or military — are also entitled to protection from hostile fire under
the Geneva Conventions, provided that structures are marked with a Red Cross or
Red Crescent and not used improperly or near military objectives, and staff are
properly protected.
Staff includes not only doctors, nurses,
and orderlies, but the drivers, cleaners, cooks, crews of hospital ships — in
short, all those who help a medical unit to function. Some aid workers — for
example, Red Cross volunteers treating the sick and wounded on the battlefield —
are also covered, as are military chaplains. Other than hospitals, certain
other buildings cannot be attacked.
Places of worship and historic monuments
are protected, as are civilian structures like schools and other objects that
are not being used to support military activities. Under the 1954 Convention on
Cultural Property important places of worship, historic sites, works of art,
and other cultural treasures are likewise protected from attack.
There are exceptions however. A school,
for example, becomes a legitimate military target if soldiers are based there
(and can be shown thus so).
With hospitals, the situation is more
complicated since they are permitted to keep armed guards on their grounds. But
immunity from attack can be lost if the people or objects are used to commit
acts that are harmful to one side in a conflict.
Finally, I say in no uncertain terms that Sen. Rafael
Edward “Ted” Cruz (R-Texas) may have Harvard
law degree and be in the U.S. Senate and yes, even a good or great debater, but
the man is dirt clod dumb. He need not be anywhere near the Oval Office except
maybe on a guided tour but never ever be the President or Commander-in-Chief,
period.
Related:
Thanks for stopping by.
No comments:
Post a Comment