Red Cross criticises allies over captives ... what a joke !!!
 

http://www.portal.telegraph.co.uk/ne...ixnewstop.html


Red Cross criticises allies over captives
By Sandra Laville
(Filed: 25/03/2003)


The International Committee of the Red Cross accused coalition forces yesterday of failing to follow the Geneva Conventions in their treatment of prisoners of war.

As British and American anger over the parading of five American soldiers on Iraqi television continued unabated, the ICRC said the allies and the Iraqis should re-examine the way they handled PoWs.

Referring to Article 13 in the third convention, Florian Westphal, from the ICRC, said PoWs should at all times be humanely treated, protected particularly against acts of violence or intimidation and against "insults and public curiosity".

He referred to photographs in the media last week which showed an Iraqi soldier in close-up being given water by American troops.

Neither side was treating PoWs in accordance with the convention, said Mr Westphal.

In a letter to The Telegraph today, Louise Christian, solicitor for three British detainees in Guantanamo Bay, said the US was breaching international law there. "On their original arrest Guantanamo detainees too were humiliated and paraded on TV manacled, shackled and hooded," she said.

Wow, not only is the Red Cross a pack of thieves now they are back stabbing liars as well :d: :d: :d: :d: :d:

Are you angry David, don't blow a fuse.
 

I wonder what country she comes from? Must be a liberal. What a bunch of jerks. :d:

Makes you never want to contribute to the Red Cross ever.

Keith

I'm four times less angry than you David :D

Made a vow...
 

...long ago to never support the Red Cross, after the way they treated me and my family years ago in Bangkok. Their thievery after 9-11-01 here in the States only strengthened my resolve to condemn them; now it appears that they too have been coopted at the International level. The world is changing faster than I can process the data!

The whole thing is a joke.
 

What's good for the goose is good for the gander. As I was watching Rumsfield's expression of self-righteous indignation on CNN, over the Iraq showing of pictures of US POWs, I was also reading the newspaper where there were several photo's of Iraq POWs being guarded by the US. One in particular that I recall was a line-up of a dozen or so POWs sitting against and wall with their hands tied behind their backs. They were captured in the city of Nasiriyah, I believe. Just arrogance and hypocrisy,

This whole controversy over article 13 is a joke.

If you want to catch some inspiringinterviews regard POW go to C-SPAN 2. Interviews of thefirst Gulf War POW'S.

The only good thing I can say about the Red Cross is that on a local level the volunteers have their hearts in the right place. To bad the Administrators embarrass the heck out of them.

Arrow>>>>>>

LEG
 

Please explain:Should Rumsfeld and all Americans NOT be indignant?Where,exactly is the arrogance and hypocracy coming from?I don`t understand where you are coming from..... "What's good for the goose is good for the gander. As I was watching Rumsfield's expression of self-righteous indignation on CNN, over the Iraq showing of pictures of US POWs, I was also reading the newspaper where there were several photo's of Iraq POWs being guarded by the US. One in particular that I recall was a line-up of a dozen or so POWs sitting against and wall with their hands tied behind their backs. They were captured in the city of Nasiriyah, I believe. Just arrogance and hypocrisy,

This whole controversy over article 13 is a joke."

MORTARDUDE...
 

Nonsensical dribble by self-important/aggrandizing beaurocrats and sellers of blood and necessities aside,...was any mention made by the Red Cross Merchants that executing POW's and ones own people and using civilians as shields, was also bad? Just curious about how Angels of Mercy really think.

Neil

I propose that all Iraqie prisoners be treated humanly with all the pork chop, bacon, and ham there missible bodys can hold, and only water to drink but we must be sure there is plenty to go around, maybe even some pork lard sandwichs for lunch, plus TV they will have to watch rosie o'donnell 24/7

sn-e3
 

You cruel man!! Rosie 24/7? I'd rather lw-crawl through 2 miles of broken beer bottles than have to sit thru that b**ch.

I do find Leg's comments rather unusual, to say the least. How does hve ing a few Iraqi POW's sitting against a wall compare with some American POW's with bullet holes in their foreheads? Leg, can you explain yourself?

phuloi
 

It is a joke because no harm has been done to either side as far as I can see. It may be a so called violation of article 13, but it has been done by both sides, and as far as I am concerned, it is an insignificant issue. There are more important issues at hand.

During Desert Storm, I saw beaucoup photo's of Iraqi POW's, but no outcry that we were violating the Convention. The only US POW's I recall seeing at that time were upon their being released, not while they were in captivity.

The positive side of the whole thing for the US, is that the photos/videos allow us to know who is a POW and what their condition appears to be. I don't believe it damages their dignity, and for the families, knowing they are POW, not MIA, may bring some small comfort amidst their despair over the fates of their sons and daughters. At least we know they are alive and there can be a post-war accountability should they disappear into the mist, as many did in RVN.

sn-e3
 

Soldiers with bullets in their foreheads are not POWs. They are not the ones I am talking about. Let's stick to the subject.

If there were executions of POWs, then there will be an post-war accounting.

I wonder how many on this site put bullets into the heads of the VC/NVA during the Vietnam War. After an assault, it was common for US soldiers to summarily execute the wounded outside of their perimeter wire. Read CHARLIE COMPANY: What Vietnam did to us, if you want examples (photo's included). IMHO, the US is far from holding the moral high road, past or present.

Leg
 

Before they had a bullet in the forehead, I'll wager that they WERE POW's - now is that sticking to the subject? If you don't think we're still occupying the high moral ground, maybe you need to pull your head out of rectal defilade. And just because you might have read something somewhere in some book sometime, doesn't make it fact or true for everybody else. Don't even think about painting everybody with the same brush, as you will insult way too many good and honorable men.

For the record and anyone who may be reading this...
 

My two units in the 25th infantry Division in 1969 / 1970 did not execute VC / NVA prisoners. God knows we had the opportunity. This was not SOP. What the ARVN did was a whole different story, but I do not know this from personal experience. I just wanted you to know where I stand on this.

Larry

Co. C 3/22 25th Infantry Division
Co. B 2/22(M) 25th Infantry Division
South Vietnam and Cambodia
Nov 1969 - Nov 1970
11C20

superscout
 

If members here want to continue to mis-interpret my postings and get nasty in the process, forget it. End of discussion

leg
 

Then make yourself or your points more clear. Taking photos of POW's is such a far cry from having them being interrogated on public and hostile TV, or can you not see the distinction? What is sounds like is your opposition to this war, and using the POW issue as your cover. Is that an accurate assessment?

SuperScout...
 

Certainly can't answer for: "Leg", nor would I even try to.

Still, and after reading and re-reading a few contrary posts, Me Thinks that your: "Assessment" is right-on-target. Just my 2 cents.

Neil