The Afghan Taliban detainees - Lawful or Unlawful Combatants

[Corocotta]

As I already said, breathing or consuming it is dangerous just like breathing or consuming lead. That's why the United States has ceased to use lead bullets for the military. But outside of depleted uranium shells, there isn't much else capable of piercing modern tanks. Tungsten, although heavy is too brittle to pierce armor as well as depleted uranium. Depleted uranium can be dangerous, however it isn't illegal.

You are partialy correc. No international treaty currently bans the production or use of DU weapons. Indeed, DU weapons are not chemical or biological weapons, therefore they cannot be considered to be illegal under the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention and the 1996 Chemical Weapons Convention. They are not nuclear weapons either and thus cannot be banned under the 1970 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. However:

However, the use of DU weapons goes against established principles of humanitarian law, notably principles of the Geneva Conventions and some UN guidelines relative to:

-the protection of civilian populations (See Articles 48 and 51.4 above)
-the limitation of unnecessary human suffering (Art.35.2)
-the limitation of damage to the environment (Art. 35.3 and 55.1)

Law, International or internal is based on basic principles. And all laws should respect this principles. I think that in a short period of time we will have a treaty that bans this weapons, the sad part is that some countries will never ratify it.....

 

[Redneck]

Law, International or internal is based on basic principles. And all laws should respect this principles. I think that in a short period of time we will have a treaty that bans this weapons, the sad part is that some countries will never ratify it.....

The sad part is that some folks expect "some countries" to sacrifice the safety and effectiveness of their servicemen by abiding by whatever new concept of what makes a weapon/weapons system too mean to be used in combat.

And based off of the information you posted, it appears that Pershing was entirely correct.

 

[Corocotta]

I was saying that the use of some weapons are against customs of war, such us cluster bombs used in build-up areas http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/attack/2003/0530illegalbombs.htm and DU ( because it produces illness when inhaleted) http://www.idust.net/

 

[CSmaster]

if U.S can justify their use of DU rounds, than terriosts probably can justify their own use of some new kinds of dirty bomb

 

[Redneck]

if U.S can justify their use of DU rounds, than terriosts probably can justify their own use of some new kinds of dirty bomb

Care to attempt to justify that comment?



staurofilakes, we have already established that certain munitions should not be and are not used in certain areas (METTT-C dependent), and DU rounds can also be harmful to your health if they hit you.

 

[Corocotta]

staurofilakes, we have already established that certain munitions should not be and are not used in certain areas (METTT-C dependent), and DU rounds can also be harmful to your health if they hit you.

Well, then we kind of agree. By the way, I am not staurofilakes any more...hehehe

 

[CSmaster]

if U.S can justify their use of DU rounds, than terriosts probably can justify their own use of some new kinds of dirty bomb

Care to attempt to justify that comment?



staurofilakes, we have already established that certain munitions should not be and are not used in certain areas (METTT-C dependent), and DU rounds can also be harmful to your health if they hit you.

ya, DU is pretty harmful right? (proven), and it brings some bad environmental effect after using it,

so does terriosts' dirty bombs, kill ppl, bring radiactive effects

same thing to me

 

[Redneck]

ya, DU is pretty harmful right? (proven), and it brings some bad environmental effect after using it,

so does terriosts' dirty bombs, kill ppl, bring radiactive effects

same thing to me

By "ppl" do you mean "people?" If you do not feel like putting the effort into using or at least attempting complete sentences and typing out full words, I will consider the offending posts spam and remove them. Once again, this is a forum for discussion, not an instant messenger conversation, and the purpose of these discussions is to communicate.


As for your allegation that DU rounds nd terrorist bombs are the same thing, aside from the fact that you are apparently operating under a very striking misconception about the range and effects of the "fallout" from DU munitions, the targets of our servicemen firing these rounds and those attacked by terrorists are completely different. Your argument might begin to possibly have some footing if we had soldiers firing SABOT rounds into civilian buses for the heck of it, but as it stands they are anything but the same thing, or even similar.

 

[CSmaster]

ok,

correct me if i understand you wrong,

you believe that it is ok for "men of justice (probably U.S)" to use DU (or other kinds of weapons that have some bad environmental effects) on the bad guys (terriosts)

ok, how about this

those terriosts consider you are the bad guy and they are the men of justice, to kill the infedal on earth for their holy war,

now both sides are happy, as they can all justify their own using of these kinds of dirty weapons,

good theory

 

[PershingOfLSU]

One of the big things that you fail to understand is that the United States uses depleted uranium rounds in order to insure the safety of American service men as much as possible when going up against armored targets. Depleted uranium rounds are used almost exclusively for attacks against armored, military targets.

A terrorist dirty bomb is intended to kill or maim as many civilians as possible.

As for whether or not American service men are willing to be exposed to depleted uranium. They rather prefer the danger of having an A-10 give them close air support to having a T-72 or terrorist position breathing down their neck. Despite using depleted uranium rounds, A-10s are consistently one of the most valued planes for CAS by infantrymen.

 

[CSmaster]

ya,


the terriosts think that their using of dirty bomb is to kill bad guys in a HOLY war...


so who is right?

both sides can justify themselves,

in this case, the winner is the right one as the winner can tell the loser to shut up, right?

 

[bulldogg]

As for whether or not American service men are willing to be exposed to depleted uranium. They rather prefer the danger of having an A-10 give them close air support to having a T-72 or terrorist position breathing down their neck. Despite using depleted uranium rounds, A-10s are consistently one of the most valued planes for CAS by infantrymen.

I would beg to differ, albeit some servicmen might prefer the exposure to DU ammo to a MBT. However for myself and other veterans I know who were exposed in 1991 they would disagree. I and the others I have spoken to about this would prefer the offending armour be taken out with a maverick, hellfire or some other weapon which would not then expose us to a silent killer.

 

[Chocobo_Blitzer]

ya,


the terriosts think that their using of dirty bomb is to kill bad guys in a HOLY war...


so who is right?

both sides can justify themselves,

in this case, the winner is the right one as the winner can tell the loser to shut up, right?

So saying it's a holy war makes killing civilians right?

 

[PershingOfLSU]

Apparently as far as CSmaster is concerned there isn't a difference between military servicemen and civilian men, women, and children.

While I obviously don't agree with those who would wage war against the United States military, if they confine their attacks to the military I can't fault them for that.

However the very purpose of a dirty bomb is to kill and maim civilians. Something CSmaster can't seem to grasp.

 

[bulldogg]

ya,


the terriosts think that their using of dirty bomb is to kill bad guys in a HOLY war...


so who is right?

both sides can justify themselves,

in this case, the winner is the right one as the winner can tell the loser to shut up, right?

Equating the use of depleted uranium rounds versus armoured targets to the use of a dirty bomb is specious logic. I resent it as this is a serious issue you are muddling up with illogical arguments. This is just a bit off topic and I have started a thread on the use of depleted uranium where it would be more germaine to hash it out.

Everyone is always right in their own mind. It is a matter of perspective that differs the interpretation. Mao Zedong and George Washington were both terrorists and insurgents or freedom fighters and patriots depending on your perspective.

And in this case, as in all wars, the winner doesn't have to tell the loser to shut up because dead men don't talk.

 

[Redneck]

CSmaster, I will let your past two posts stand as others have already responded to them, but if you continue to ignore warnings, further disciplinary action will be required. Put forth the effort to make your posts readable or do not post.

 

[Italian Guy]

Would it be relevant to raise the issue of the Taliban goverment not being recognized by the world community ?
I mean lawful combatants belong to a government and act according to the laws of war.
Now what if that gov is not recognized? does it stillmake sense to talk about lawfulness of combatants?

 

[Corocotta]

Would it be relevant to raise the issue of the Taliban goverment not being recognized by the world community ?
I mean lawful combatants belong to a government and act according to the laws of war.
Now what if that gov is not recognized? does it stillmake sense to talk about lawfulness of combatants?

I think GC does not say anything about this.

 

[LeEnfield]

Now just what do you do with armed civilians who think nothing of killing people for reasons that you would believe. Do you turn them lose to start again or do you do what America has done and that is remove from this Afghanistan completely. Until things have settled down there or they have changed their ways, and later is most unlikely. Many of these people that America has detained are the hard line Taliban they were the local enforcers the muscle, they are the people that want to return the very simple life that they claim is gods will, no radios no music, no television, no medicine, no books no newspapers, no sport. Any one caught doing any of these things can be severely punished or even killed. We all know about political niceties, but you can not always treat these people as you would a fellow American as their concept of the law is so different to yours

 

[AlexKall]

Don't know if i've replyed to this before.

Just a note, the human rights (regarding torture and such) still applies for terrorists whenever they are classed as prisoners of war or not, as of UN resolusion.