Geneva Convention

All the U.S. media is currently harping on Iraq's violations of the Geneva Convention regarding their display of POWs on TV. I apologize for my ignorance on the subject, but what is the specific nature of the violation. I ask because I swear I saw footage on one of the networks where a U.S. reporter was showing some of the Iraqis being held by our troops. He walked up to three POWs, two of which were lying down under blankets so their faces were hidden. The other, however, was sitting up underneath his blanket, and his face was clearly shown for several seconds. Can someone please explain to me what the difference between the two was, and what exactly was violated in the rules set by the Geneva Convention?

It''s my understanding that a government can''t show specific interrogations of an individual. This is nothing new. I think the real problem here is that many of the bodies in US uniforms appeared to have been executed which is most definitely a Geneva Convention violation. It''s my personal opinion that we''re just using the broadcasting as an opportunity to put out a warning.

"Sway" wrote:

All the U.S. media is currently harping on Iraq''s violations of the Geneva Convention regarding their display of POWs on TV. I apologize for my ignorance on the subject, but what is the specific nature of the violation. I ask because I swear I saw footage on one of the networks where a U.S. reporter was showing some of the Iraqis being held by our troops. He walked up to three POWs, two of which were lying down under blankets so their faces were hidden. The other, however, was sitting up underneath his blanket, and his face was clearly shown for several seconds. Can someone please explain to me what the difference between the two was, and what exactly was violated in the rules set by the Geneva Convention?

That was government footage and I think most of the people are mad that the POW were shot in the back of the head. I''ve not seen the footage but that''s what I''ve heard on the news.

I''ve seen some footage here of Iraqi troops ""searching"" for a downed airman or marine by systematically machine gunning the river banks. Anyone who believes that the Iraqi''s are going to abide by the Geneva conventions are living in a dreamland.

EDIT: Anyway apparently thepart of article 3 of the Geneva convention forbids showing POW''s in a degrading or humiliating fashion (as Saddam has done) that''s what everybody is so annoyed about.

Anyway apparently thepart of article 3 of the Geneva convention forbids showing POW''s in a degrading or humiliating fashion (as Saddam has done) that''s what everybody is so annoyed about.

As for the blankets, anybody thats been out in the desert camping can tell you that it can get quite cold at night. You very likely have seen some of the reporters bundled up for some of their reports, not only that but the blanket during the day also keeps the sun off.

Note: The Iraqi Ministry of Information has already stated that they will be treating any captures as mercs. Hence they have no plans to follow the Geneva convention, besides they never have in the past.

Sorry, that''s not quite correct. Just saw the press conference of Said Al Sahaf again, he said something like:

""What will be consider them like? War criminals? Mercenaries? No, I will give you the official answer of my country.We will adhere to the Geneva conventions.""

EDIT: Actually the article you linked to says:

Later, the Iraqi Satellite TV released a statement from Saddam Hussein that Iraq will respect the enemy prisoners who are captured by our brave Armed Forces.

""Their rights will be respected in accordance with the law on prisoner rights provided by the Geneva Convention, despite our knowledge that the U.S. administration perpetrated the most grotesque crimes against our people and humanity,"" the statement said.

Later, Iraqi Minister of Information Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf said that Saddam ""ordered that despite all the crimes ... treatment of foreign soldiers will be according to Geneva convention.""

JD,

Reread my link.. It states flat out that they came out later and said what you did. BUT this was only AFTER the ourcry as well as the photos/footage came out. [sarcasm]So yes they''re ALL about following the convention.[/sarcasm]

Oh c''mon. As if they hadn''t known before that there will be an outcry and anger if they show US POWs on tv. Also, Hussein had demanded treatment according to Geneva conventions for POWs made in a speech some days ago. This topic hasn''t been brought up just yesterday.

"dgrey" wrote:

As for the blankets, anybody thats been out in the desert camping can tell you that it can get quite cold at night. You very likely have seen some of the reporters bundled up for some of their reports, not only that but the blanket during the day also keeps the sun off.

I never doubted that was what the blankets were for. In fact, the news reporter mentioned that they were each given a blanket, a bottle of water, and a food package. I was mainly curious if it was the showing of the face that was the violation or something else.

Oh... nevermind then.

Also you might want to note, it looks like we''re medivaccing(sp?) quite a few of the surrenders out, quite a few are ill/malnourished and are causing health problems, as well as injured from combat excerises.

"Sway" wrote:

I was mainly curious if it was the showing of the face that was the violation or something else.

There were reports in german media about the same issue. They were wondering as well since CNN and other channels showed Iraqi prisoners shortly before that. But when you listen to what Rumsfeld and others said it becomes clear that he was not meaning that. I am not sure if filming faces is against the genever convention, but the imprisoned GIs sure looked frightened and bruised up. And what lead to their state, if it is what we all think, is a breach of the genever convention.

Filming in and of itself isn''t a violation. What really is the violation is the intent of the video & the standards of what is displayed. I.E. you can film them surrendering/the conditions they''re in. But you can''t film them and use it to humiliate/propagandize(is this even a word??).