Quote:
Originally Posted by Stompy
hahaha, so there are now "rules" in war? Hm... so anyone not following the rules is a "terrorist"?
"Hey, that's not fair! You aren't part of the Iraqi army!! THE RULES SAY YOU CAN'T DO THAT, SO YOU ARE A TERRORIST"
|
I suppose you don't know about the Geneva Convention. This protects YOU and ever citizen of Eurpoe, U.S., or some countries in Asia and South America from chemical weapons, expanding bullets or materials calculated to cause unnecessary suffering, projectiles from baloons, being inhumanely treated as a POW, being killed after surrendering, being attacked if sick and injured, starved by an invading country, having civilian ships from being attacked, and talking privately when captured. If those rules are ignored by members, they are guilty of war crimes and are subject to prosecution by a world court.
There are rules in war. There are countless treaties just like the Geneva Convention to make war as sane and fair as it can possibly be. BTW, I realize that war is not rational or fair, but when it happens, we need to control the destruction as much as possible. For example: Hague laws were broken by Iraqi troops who waved a white flag and then opened fire on U.S. soldiers who approached to accept the surrender. The reason it is wrong is that if one group breaks this, then those who truely surrender will not be trusted. This is not fair for those who truely want to surrender.
Terrorist, in the case as described above, is a radical person or group officially independant from any goverment, that caries out unlawful attacks in order to force their beliefs on others. That's at least my take on what it means as of now.