Phil Duncan on Thu, 27 Feb 2003 01:57:01 +0100 (CET) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
[Nettime-bold] Combative recontextualization |
The following is from: http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=YDL4XZ1WDJ3ZECRBAEZSFEY?type=worldNews&storyID=2294634 A senior defense official, briefing reporters on condition of anonymity, also said foreigners who have arrived in Baghdad to volunteer as "human shields" at key Iraqi sites may be considered war combatants rather than innocent civilians. ... Foreign "volunteers," including some from Europe who drove from London, arrived in Baghdad this month and have begun to take their places at Iraqi installations to serve as human shields in the hope of warding off attacks. The senior defense official said, "I'm not a legal expert, but you certainly could argue that since they're working in the service of the Iraqi government, they may in fact have crossed the line between combatant and noncombatant." -end quote- It seems the US senior leadership is facing up to the challenge posed by the international peaceful protesters, offering the war mongering corporate coalition an opportunity to think twice about bombing the shit out Baghdad, in typical form. By declaring humanitarian efforts "combatant," the US Hawks have posited any kind of relief aid as "enemy" and therefore fair game as cannon fodder. What's next? Does this precedent mean that the Red Cross and Crescent are also fair targets? Why is it not surprising that this tactic comes out of the same end of the machine that also accuses the Iraqi administration of, "violation of the fundamental principle that civilians and civilian objects must be protected in wartime." Perhaps it is true that we despise in others those things about which we hold ourselves in contempt... -pause rant- _______________________________________________ Nettime-bold mailing list Nettime-bold@nettime.org http://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold