OscailtUS Commits Atrocity in Pakistan, NYT DeflectsVillagers Discover Unexploded US Missile2007-01-21T02:40:27+08:00Anarkismoanarkismoeditors@lists.riseup.nethttp://www.anarkismo.net/atomfullposts?story_id=4685http://www.anarkismo.net/graphics/feedlogo.gifBlame the Victimshttp://www.anarkismo.net/article/4685#comment40372007-01-21T02:40:27+08:00Paul WolfAl Jazeera took a photo showing the US markings on the bomb. You can google it ...Al Jazeera took a photo showing the US markings on the bomb. You can google it and find their photo. The reporters claiming it's old and weathered, and just a set up by dishonest tribesmen - where is their photo? <br />
<br />
Now Pakistan is changing its story and claiming it bombed the village with its own planes, and sent in helicopters later. <br />
<br />
How pathetic. <br />
<br />
Interesting point about the attack being illegal. Can the President of Pakistan ignore it when a foreign country bombs Pakistan? Maybe the Pakistani president can allow the US to bomb and invade his country. Is it an act of aggression if the Pakistanis agree to it? An interesting legal question.On the Legality of Human Slaughterhttp://www.anarkismo.net/article/4685#comment40402007-01-21T09:45:19+08:00Jeff McMahanNow, this comes from someone not well versed in international law, but as far as...Now, this comes from someone not well versed in international law, but as far as I am aware, it would be illegal to for any nation's military to slaughter any person not enlisted in another nation's military (perhaps, given the US' recent troubles, "combatants" may be covered also).<br />
<br />
In this basic sense, I understand the US actions as having been illegal. It makes little difference whether or not Pakistani military officials okayed the US attack, so long as the US attacked (with military personnel and equipment) innocent, unarmed civilians. That is clearly what they did.<br />
<br />
The Geneva Conventions, of which the US is a signatory, forbids such actions and the standards set forth by the Geneva conventions are considered binding international law, and other nations have paid the price for violating them. Not only this, but the UN Declaration on Human Rights obviously precludes the possibilty that these sorts of atrocities can move forward unchallenged by international law. (Not that international law presents the US much of a challenge.)