Questions on Geneva Conventions

[doc03]

Ok, these were rules of war agreed to by many countries including the US after WWII right?
Who enforcers them? the UN? NATO?
How can one country such as the US alter the rules?
Wasn't Milosevitch tried for war crimes committed against the Geneva Conventions?
Why didn't Milosevitch just change the laws for his country and avoid prosecution?
The bottom line can Bush and his henchmen be prosecuted for war crimes by some international court even though he said the rules don't apply to him?
I don't understand this, if everyone in the UN is against us why hasn't the USA been charged with war crimes already?
Has the winner of a war ever been charged and convicted of war crimes?

[ChairmanAgnostic]

1. before and after.

The first Geneva was agreed to in the mid 1800s and altered and added to before WWI if memory serves. The other 3 conventions were added on as required, covering sea combatants and other issues. The 3d one covers prisoners of war and provides the greatest sticking point for the war criminals temporarily inhabiting the VP and the Pres' offices.

The world court and the UN can pursue war criminals.

Milosevich learned that simply saying something ain's so, does not help one, unless that one happens to have the most atomic weapons on the face of the globe.

Yes, he can be tried, even if he pardons himself. His pardon will not affect international prosecutions (ask Henry Kissinger why he rarely, if ever, leaves the US) but only would help him with domestic prosecutions.

The winner takes all. In all too many cases.

[doc03]

2. This is very confusing to me, when I was in the Army we had

classes on the rules of the Geneva Conventions and were told of our rights and the rights of the enemy. Then I see our pilot Jeffery Zahn I believe his name was and all Iraq did show his picture on TV and the USA was screaming about Saddam violating the Geneva Conventions and should be tryed for war crimes, now we can do anything we please and it's OK, If you bring up torcher to most people they think we should be able to do anything, I had an argument with an old friend this morning about the subject and he thinks we are too soft on them.

[luckyleftyme2]

3. the truth is

listening to fisk on tv today,my conclusion is we're being lied to again.
they aren't going to follow the geneva convention,but are using a format that is not geneva convention. the're using military guide lines of war! IN other words they are doing an end run around the geneva convention but tryingto make the public believe they are using it.

[dflprincess]

4. I've noticed the way the U.S. media has been reporting it,

it, at times, sounds like the Geneva Accords were written after WWII as a reaction to Hitler. My brother pointed out that anyone whoever watched "Hogan's Heroes" would know that isn't the case as Colonel Hogan was always throwing Geneva at Colonel Klink.


The media also never mentions that German soldiers, when facing defeat, would do their best to surrender to American troops because they knew they would be treated better than if they surrendered to the Soviets.