On April 3, I heard part of NPR's "Talk of the Nation," with guests Ken Anderson Professor of International Law at American University's Washington College of Law. and Scott Silliman, Director Center for Law, Ethics & National Security: talked on International law pertaining to war. The information they presented was eye opening, to say the least. According to International law:

- Bush, not just Saddam, is a legitimate military target because he is the Commander-in-Chief of the US armed forces.

- Shooting civilians without clear evidence that they are an imminent threat to soldier is against Rules of Engagement and Geneva convention. Thus the soldiers who killed the women and children in the Toyota van at the checkpoint are, technically, war criminals.

- Cluster bombs - Cluster bombs are only allowable under extremely strict guidelines, only in a military-to-military situation - absolutely not within a city. (observers say there is mounting evidence that cluster bombs are being used repeatedly on Baghdad targets).

- The US is conducting this war as a nation that rejected the 1977 Geneva Convention Protocols.

Thus, while Bush is trying to present himself and the US government as "great liberators," insisting on a kinder, gentler regime - our stand on international law has made us Earth's biggest hypocrites. The U.S. is one of the only "advanced" nations on Earth not to ratify the Protocols (I and II) of the Geneva Convention. These protocols, first proposed in 1977, are designed SPECIFICALLY to reduce civilian suffering and promote humanitarian goals. Yet they were not ratified by Ronald Reagan in the 1980s, because, he claimed, it would give leftwing uprisings too much of an edge - in other words, running CIA-style operations aimed at overthrowing "inconvenient" governments, like Allende's in Chile or Sukarno's in Indonesia, would be hampered by having to adhere to a code of humanitarian ethics. The Protocols were turned down again by the Republican-dominated Congress in the 1990s when Clinton submitted them for reconsideration. Now with a rightwing president AND Congress, the changes of humanitarian protocols passing is nil.. Among the things that the Protocols ban and the rightwing hawks continue to fight to retain the right to do:

- Using children under 18 as soldiers - the UK and the US are two of the only developed nations on earth to permit the use of 16 and 17-year olds as soldiers, requiring only parental permission (any parent who gives their permission is grossly irresponsible - that act should constitute child abuse.).

-using landmines and other weapons that induce excessive suffering and damage.

- blinding civilians with high tech lasers

- insisting that fighting parties in international armed conflicts to distinguish at all times between combatants and civilians to ensure that the only legal targets of attack are military.

Oh, and if anyone has any illusions about how Iraqis will be treated in the post-war era, one of the clauses of the Protocol the rightwingers (who will be Iraq's "rulers") refused to accept is the right of noncombatants, especially children to be given the care and aid they require for a normal childhood, including education and reunion with their families, should the conflict tear them apart.

The US also was the only country besides Somalia to NOT ratify the Convention for the Rights of the Child, which prevents children from being abused, used as soldiers, sexually exploited or used for labor. About 200 other nations ratified the Convention - immediately and without question.

The US was also the only developed nation to refuse to ban anti-personnel land mines.

The US was one of the only developed nations to refuse to recognize the international criminal court (thus trying to avoid ever having to face the music for acts the rest of the world condemns as war crimes).

The average American, if they had been given a say, would ABSOLUTELY have made sure that all of these things were adopted, from the Protocols to the International Court. But then, the average American is a decent, compassionate person without any ulterior motives for wanted to retain the right to commit atrocities or abuse the rights of children.

Here's an excellent overview of the Protocols and the US's sorry history in humanitarian issues

http://carlisle-www.army.mil/usawc/Parameters/02summer/lacey.htm

Update: 4/03 4:05 pm

Bush at Camp Legeune: Playing to a captive audience

Bush's stock with the public has gone down so far that he can't even be sure of getting an enthusiastic audience at elementary schools any more (his former favorite PR venue, back when he was posing as "the education president"). So now he is reduced to playing before a small audience of aging, handpicked WWII vets whose incomes don't rely on the slashed resources of the VA (last Friday), and before post-bootcamp recruits at military bases. These poor guys have no choice but to show up and applaud - it's no doubt that or 100 pushups and KP for a month, at the least!)But even so, at Camp Legeune today, as the Fuhrer babbled on about the "vice tightening around Baghdad" (it took Ari Fleischer two days to think that one up!) in the background, the marines looked less than adoring. But, thanks to microphone magic and several large, fierce-looking drill sergeants standing in the wings, the video/radio footage presented enthusiastic applause and a few cheers (those were probably from Bush aides, standing next to the mikes). But the facial expressions said it all. I don't think Saddam's army are the only one's with "guns to their heads."

Live from Baghdad

Caught last five minutes of an interview with Greg Nelson of Cox newspapers reporting llive from Baghdad.

Cox Says people are forced into darkness at night to prevent US bombers from seeing targets clearly...this requires the cutting of electricity, which also shuts down water pumps and purifying systems.

Last few days, a substantial amount of fresh food is getting through from the south of the country. This passage of scores of produce trucks through the supposed 100-mile military barrier - supposedly relentlessly bombarded, to hear Bush & Co. talk, supports the claim of some Iraqi officials and westerners in Baghdad that the US military is further away from the city, at least in substantial force, than it claims to be, with the bombardment more strictly localized.

Cox said Saddam appeared on TV last night - pre-taped at an undisclosed location so that the TV signal cannot be used to pinpoint his location and a smart bomb launched to kill him.

He also reports that the U.S. dropped a bomb directly on the main terminal of the commercial airport outside Baghdad. Cox says the airport was currently being used - with cars coming and going.