This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Iflipti (talk | contribs) at 11:25, 6 January 2006 (→Is the Hussein trial a war-crimes tribunal?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 11:25, 6 January 2006 by Iflipti (talk | contribs) (→Is the Hussein trial a war-crimes tribunal?)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Definition is incorrect
There are a number of inaccuracies with this article. First off, it defines war crimes incorrectly. If it, unfortunately, not true that "Every violation of the law of war is a war crime." The laws of armed conflict ('international humanitarian law' or IHL) consist of many rules that bind the behavior of states, but only some rules are considered serious enough that they lead to criminal prosecution of individuals. It is that subset of violations of IHL that can be considered war crimes. Also, the article refers to war crimes as being part of human rights law; as described above, they are part of IHL, which is actually a separate body of international law, though of course they have complementary interests.
Agreed. The errors above should be fixed. In addition, I don't know that the distinction between internal and international armed conflict is necessary any longer. Violations of IHL committed during a purely internal armed conflict may not be considered Grave Breaches of the Geneva Conventions, but they will almost certainly fall under Common Article 3 (of the Geneva Conventions) or as violations of the laws and customs of war (previously customary international law, but now codified in the Rome Statute).
George H.W. Bush
"Condemnation" is not charging. We're talking about people who've actually gone to trial here. Meelar 06:14, 2 May 2004 (UTC)
You're going to need a better source than an off-handed comment by Chomsky to place someone in a shortlist of of war criminals. I can't find a primary source for this or even a decent secondary source. The International Court of Justice (World Court) does not list any case whatever involving the U.S. and Panama and a search of their site does not even mention Bush's name. Further, even if there were a case (which there isn't) the WC decides complaints between nations, it doesn't try individuals. Cecropia 04:36, 6 May 2004 (UTC)
- Quick Google search gives: , , , , ... I guess that WC archives don't go back to 1986. Nikola 05:17, 7 May 2004 (UTC)
- I've done a lot of research in my life and have discovered that all you need is one bad citation that is then picked up over and over, especially by partisans, which describes the sources you're giving, some of which don't even mention the alleged incident and none giving a primary source. If six people repeat a lie it doesn't make it less a lie. The point is I went to the primary source, and it just isn't there. -- Cecropia 05:28, 7 May 2004 (UTC)
- The International Court of Justice Records go back to 1947 with UK vs Albania. I'll comment that Chomsky seems to "know" many things that noone else has heard of. If you see him say something, you should look for a primary source. -- Cecropia 05:31, 7 May 2004 (UTC)
Chomsky: The first thing you ought to do is verify what I present. Just because I say it doesn't make it true. So check it out, see what looks correct, what looks wrong, look at other material which wasn't discussed, figure out what the truth really is. That's what you've got a brain for. What's the source you're refering to? Could you put a link here, please? If not, I'll pick it up in a little while. Mr. Jones 11:09, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Original cite came from the now-banned User:Troll Silent, Troll Deep. Meelar 04:38, 6 May 2004 (UTC)
- ? I can't see him ever editing the article? Nikola 05:17, 7 May 2004 (UTC)
- Meeler, please provide evidence for this assertion. Mr. Jones 11:09, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Should there be a list of (percieved?) war crimes?
Should there be a page listing cases which appear, or are possibly perceived by many individuals, to be war crimes?
I think this would be a worthwhile project. For one thing, its not information collated elsewhere. For another it might make people think. I'd like to add this, but solicit other opinions first.
- Page now added War crimes list FT2 16:18, Jul 22, 2004 (UTC)
Moved from Casualties_of_the_conflict_in_Iraq_since_2003
Nowhere in this article is any mention of a count of deaths of Iraqi police, soldiers and recruits. Nor is there a count of civilian deaths caused by reactionary forces operating in Iraq. I've scoured the internet and find nothing. Maybe these victims are not important?! Also, the statistics at this site would mean more if there were some comparisons (or links to such), such as the number of civilian deaths caused by the Allied D-Day invasion in combating Fascism, that is, to recent wars. According to the above statement, the Allies would have been responsible for French deaths, oddly insinuating that the war against Hitler would have been somehow illegal. Also, the statistics seem for many here more important than the idealogy behind the "insurgents". No interest in that, ....? Whyerd 19:02, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Certainly there have been criticisms of the allies for bombing German civilians, yes. Noam Chomsky has described the principles of the Nuremberg courts thus:
... you have to ask yourself what was called a "war crime"? How did they decide what was a war crime at Nuremberg and Tokyo? And the answer is pretty simple, and not very pleasant. There was a criterion. Kind of like an operational criterion. If the enemy had done it and couldn't show that we had done it, then it was a war crime. So like bombing of urban concentrations was not concidered a war crime because we had done it more than the Germans and Japanese. ... Bombing Dresden is not a war crime because we did it.
- And that formed the basis for the UN conventions, for the Geneva convention; the trials an Nuremburg, etc. However, it can be argued that every president has violated those rules: (Search for "I've done that in print a couple of times.") From his point of view, it's then not surprising that the President disregards the UN.
- This doesn't belong here. I'm going to post it here then move it to Talk:war crime.
- Mr. Jones 10:53, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- There's no lack of interest, it's just not the subject of this article. There's lots of info about the insurgents at Iraqi resistance. As for certain counts not appearing in this article, the problem is, they don't exist (as you've seen by scouring the internet). We can't give counts that aren't known. Neow 22:30, Oct 10, 2004 (UTC)
Heads of state?
The reference to heads of state seems incorrect. Tojo, for instance, was surely not the head of state in Japan -- that would have been the Emperor. Similarly for the German example.
Peace Crimes
Recently there have also appeared testimonies of "peace crimes" committed against the Nazi children in the peace time after the war, after 1945, as part of the victors' celebration. These peace crimes reflect the complexity of justice when the winners' mentality dominates in international criminal tribunals.
Does this belong? What are "Peace Crimes"? Why blur the distinction between War Crimes and other acts of barbarism in the middle of an article on war crimes?
NPOV
I'm concerned that the last paragraph may not be NPOV, because it seems to imply not merely that the dropping of the atom bombs and the treatment of the East Timorese may have been war crimes, but that they were. Donald Ian Rankin 23:09, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
- It has been edited, but I'm not sure if such alleged examples should be mentioned at all. Shawnc 00:05, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
George W. Bush
I've noticed that there have been multiple instances where someone has put George W. Bush's biography at whitehouse.gov. I removed the link, just thought that you might want to keep an eye on it. - Richard Evan 11:13, 9 December 2005
Is the Hussein trial a war-crimes tribunal?
I was under the impression that Hussein is being tried locally under Iraqi law, not as part of a UN-sanctioned war-crimes tribunal. --Delirium 06:43, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
- No, it is not a war crime tribunal. The murder of your own civilians by the government is murder, not a war crime. It's also being described as "crimes against humanity." That may be an accurate statement, but it doesn't have much legal meaning.
Also, as a technical point, the UN does not have to sanction war-crimes tribunals. -- Cecropia 07:26, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
It should be noted that Hussein's trial is not taking place at the Hague. As a side note the proceedings are similar, but not the same as the Hague's as well. ----