Your assuming again , you have no proof who was killed in those huts and again the Air Force was directed to target those homes by Afghan and coalition ground forces . The pilots did not fly in and say hey there are civilians lets bomb them



What a silly statement - LOL
For all the pilots knew they were directed to hit an enemy target - Now if you can tell me that the pilots were told to hit a target filled with civilians then you are correct

Article 51, Protocol 1 Additional to the Geneva Conventions, 1977:

"7. The presence or movements of the civilian population or individual civilians shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular in attempts to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield, favor or impede military operations. The Parties to the conflict shall not direct the movement of the civilian population or individual civilians in order to attempt to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield military operations."



Not in all circumstances, the most obvious of which would be if there are opposing forces occupying the structure and/or are using it for military purposes ...



Again, that's you applying your interpretation onto what Carp said. *He* never said the Governor ordered war crimes.

I see , so let the Taliban go into villages and shoot civilians and police at will , humm okay but wait thats what they were doing before the bombings . So stopping the bombing does nothing in fact the bombing follows the Taliban atrocities were they go bombs follow



That would be correct - Now even Karzai said himself the real solution is the Afghan army becomes strong enough to defend itself . I don't know why its taking so long to get up to size and strength by now ? ? But once that happens the US can get out of there

I hate when someone puts words in my mouth

I am not making excuses for anyone , just pointing out km assuming the US committed war crimes when the the real criminal was the Taliban

I'm aware of the provision but your statement about its effect is incorrect. The Geneva Conventions operate against states not individuals. The Statute of Rome which is operational against individuals incorporates certain of the Geneva provisions but not the one you're citing. That's excluded because its subordinate to the overriding prohibition against attacks on civilians in all circumstances.

Other reason why the ICC can't act on carp's suggestion is that the Statute of Rome requires it to give way to the Afghan authorities under the principle of 'complemetarity'. Furthermore, that in any case it's a load of baloney traceable to an uncorroborated inadmissible hearsay statement of Chuck Marsh. Even if the court had jurisdiction, which it doesn't, I think it would need something a bit more substantial than what Chuck Marsh makes up for gullible consumers of the US media.


I'm talking about the circumstances of the case - Bala Baluk where 147 civilians including women and children were killed and others maimed in private homes - which ones are you talking about?


No, that's contradicted by the Statute of Rome, Art 8.


Well, obviously one has to join up his allegation, unsupported though it is, that the Air Force was acting on directions of the "governor" with what those directions were namely to bomb residential homes which happens to be a war crime. The pilots are unswerable for their actions whether they acted on invitation or otherwise - Statute of Rome Art 8(2)(a)(i):

"wilful killing"

and 8(2)(b(ii):

"intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population or individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities"

as well as 8(2)(b)(iv):

"intentionally launching an attack in the knowledge that such attack will cause incidental loss of life or injury to civilians..."

Now we all know that carp is trying to wriggle out of the fact that US pilots are answerable for their actions in Afghanistan before the ICC. His argument that they were under orders or directed by Afghan officials isn't good enough - it's never been a defence to murder to say "someone else is also guilty".

km

1st - Again I did not say the governor ordered war crimes - putting words in people mouths is shameful

2nd - The governor ordered Afghan troops and coalition forces into the villages - YOUR the one that assuming yet again that he ordered them to bomb houses

Your right



Guilty Taliban



Guilty Taliban leaders



Guilty Taliban - Keep in mind that they went into the village and started shooting at civilians and the police

Also keep in mind that the Pilots were directed to those targets which Afghan forces were receiving fire from - All they knew was those targets were Taliban

Heres more proof

From your favorite Aljazeera so don't tell me the site is bias



This clearly shows that the Taliban is in direct violation of Statute of Rome Art 8 - Taliban taking hostages to use as human shields



Another direct violation - even if you work in a government office - your are still a civilian first

The more opinions, the better. Nobody I know has said otherwise. Nobody I know is necessarily disputing the issue raised, either. What I will always rail against, however, is what I read as predictable bias. If I see it, I call it. If you see it in a different light, that's your bidness. How I see it is my bidness. And if that's idiotic in your book, so be it. Somehow, I will survive the shame of it all.

What you said was that

"governor called in pro-government troops to repel Taliban fighters"

What they actually did was attack private homes which is a war crime, Statute of Rome, Art 8.

Earlier you had said:

"the Afghans told the US where to bomb"

Makes no difference whether that was the governor or some other Afghan - the fact is that private homes were bombed which is a war crime, Statute of Rome, Art 8


That's a matter for the Afghan authorities, not the ICC.

US pilot civilian killings are a matter for the ICC.

km

LOL

NO the fact is that the Taliban attacked the villages and held hostages or killed hostages - and then attacked government troops from those homes

Get your facts strait