International laws hinder UK troops - Reid

[spindrifter]

Richard Norton-Taylor and Clare Dyer
Tuesday April 4, 2006
The Guardian

John Reid demanded sweeping changes to international law yesterday to free British soldiers from the restraints of the Geneva conventions and make it easier for the west to mount military actions against other states.
In his speech, the defence secretary addressed three key issues: the treatment of prisoners, when to mount a pre-emptive strikes, and when to intervene to stop a humanitarian crisis. In all these areas, he indicated that the UK and west was being hamstrung by existing inadequate law.

Mr Reid indicated he believed existing rules, including some of the conventions - a bedrock of international law - were out of date and inadequate to deal with the threat of international terrorists.

<snip>

He also spoke of the "concept of imminence" - the circumstances when a state could strike without waiting for an attack.

<snip>

http://www.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/story/0,,1746322,00.html

++++++++++++++++++++

Can anything be more disasterous than trying officially to step away from morality? Can we expect morality on the part of others when we reject it ourselves? The West is trying to adopt philosophical terrorism and justifying it by fiat.

[smoochpooch]

1. "I learned it by watching you!!"

Who can blame him now that the Bushies legitimized torture and pre-emptive strikes? Still, I bet they won't recognize pre-emptive rights for anyone who isn't part of the "coalition of the willing".

[FrenchieCat]

2. Do the Brits ever come up with their own ideas?

How sickening.....that they would copy the devil!