Do as you please, not as you should, right?


I've tried to avoid this topic since sunday, but I just have to get something of my chest now. So, the USA captured Saddam - that ain't news anymore I guess - if you somehow missed that fact, I wonder where you've been? Hiding in a hole somewhere maybe?

Bush (or someone of his administration) made a statement today : "Saddam will be considered a prisoner of war (POW) and will receive all rights and duties that come with that status." Sounds pretty fair, don't you think? But wait... they weren't done talking just yet : "However, for the time being, we have not yet declared him a POW."

Of course they have not yet declared him a POW officially, and here are - according to me - the reasons for that "delay" :

  1. POWs must be protected in their honor. In particular they must not be subject to insults, violence and public curiosity whether from enemy forces or civilians. They must not be paraded or interrogated in front of the media, and their images should not be used for political purposes.
  2. Among the rights afforded to POWs are to: practice their religion, send and receive letters, receive a copy of the Geneva Conventions, and appoint a representative among themselves to deal with the detaining authorities

(source : Human Rights Watch, Rights and Duties of Prisoners of War)

In short it comes down to this : if the US forces had declared Saddam a POW, they would not have been allowed to show him off in the media, nor use his capture (and images of him) for political purposes. What do you think they are doing right now? They also wouldn't have been able to question him as they pleased (much like they did with the hundreds of "illegal non-combatants picked up off of the battlefield" that are still locked up at Guantanamo Bay).

So, while the USA continues to "police" the world, while it preaches peace (what a fine choice of words, don't you agree), and fights for Freedom - so help us God - they continue to play by their own rules. International treaties are only accepted if it fits, and as easily abandoned and disregarded if they interfere with those plans.

Where will Saddam be tried? Iraq seems the most correct place to have the trial, but as the country is still in shatters - and will be for a few more years at least - that trial could be a decade or more away. The UN tribunal in The Hague is another possibility, but... I almost forgot : the US doesn't recognize that tribunal. One starts to wonder why?


just one remark;
we're on the same level of understanding, it 's a pitty 99% of the ppl living in western world believe the things they see in the news and what worldleaders say instead of making up their own opinion

I thought they hadn't done it yet because they are too busy "interrogating" him first. By which I'm convinced they mean "torturing him for information". I hadn't thought of the media aspect, good point.

Monthly Archives


OpenID accepted here Learn more about OpenID
Powered by Movable Type 5.04

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by ServMe published on December 15, 2003 8:27 PM.

Wow, x-mas gifts! was the previous entry in this blog.

Party! is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.