Wolsely, just a suggestion: Stop a second and think before you post, okay?
This isn't rocket science. It was the entire basis for the Cold War.
People violate the Geneva Convention when the price of adhering to it is greater than the price of breaking it.
When you're country is being invaded, and you're losing, it's virtually impossible to make your situation worse. About the only thing that could make it worse was if Saddam used chem or bio weapons, which would end any real support he was getting and any chance of international pressure ending the war. Notice: He hasn't used chemical or bio weapons. I would be very suprised if he did prior to a "last stand" sort of situation.
This isn't a difficult concept. It's relatively straightforward.
Why would we do that? I would think the international backlash would be horrendous. We have a lot to lose by violating the Geneva Convention (well, more than we have). Saddam doesn't. Not anymore.Hmmm......the Geneva Convention is not a rule for warfare, and it won't work anyway; and in love and war all things are allowed.
Good deal. You just made it supremely easy for us to wrap this thing up within 30 minutes.
Message to Omaha: reposition your ICBM's to 33°14'N, 44°22'E, and fire at will.
Goodbye, Baghdad.
Did you think about it? What would happen if Saddam nuked Washington? He'd be nuked in return. He'd only do it if he was screwed anyways.But you see what would happen if we didn't have international laws regulating warfare?
And just for kickers, we are abiding by the Geneva Convention, and we also are not about to use a strategic nuke to vaporize Baghdad.
Uncle Saddam, however, has no qualms whatsoever about violating the Geneva Convention, which he has just proved. Can anyone doubt that were he in possession of a strategic nuke with a suitable delivery system, that he would have any qualms about launching it at Washington, or New York, or Los Angeles, London, or wherever? I don't.
This isn't rocket science. It was the entire basis for the Cold War.
People violate the Geneva Convention when the price of adhering to it is greater than the price of breaking it.
When you're country is being invaded, and you're losing, it's virtually impossible to make your situation worse. About the only thing that could make it worse was if Saddam used chem or bio weapons, which would end any real support he was getting and any chance of international pressure ending the war. Notice: He hasn't used chemical or bio weapons. I would be very suprised if he did prior to a "last stand" sort of situation.
This isn't a difficult concept. It's relatively straightforward.
Upvote
0