Your funny go troll elsewhere. It's absolutely hilarious that you quote the constitution
without having any clue as to the legal definition of your quote.

I gave three examples one a supreme court case and current events to back up what I said
and you gave nothing but wise cracks.

A president can withdraw from any treaty at anytime.
Goldwater v. Carter, 444 U.S. 996 (1979)



But if you need violations of the Geneva Convention and or Crimes against humanity going
largely unpunished.

:
Time Location Perpetrators Victims Number of victims


1929 to 1953 Russia Communists - Stalin Public
20million+

1949 to 1987 China Communists Chinese public 40 million

1975 to 1979 Cambodia Khmer Rouge Public 1.7 to 2 million

1975 to 1999 East Timor Muslims Roman Catholics 200,000

1985 Sudan Gov and militia Public
200,000+

1994 to 1996 Chechnya Russia Public
30,000



These are just the highlights if you want more recent events we can start with pakistan
and the collective punishment of spinkai agaisnt international law and work from there.

It seems your great belief in treaties is flawed. Unless of course the USSR and china
sitting in condemnation of the Nazi's and Japanese at nuremberg for war crimes while at
the same time committing the same crimes with impunity was part of the treaty.

The strong make the rules and the strong can break the rules. Which means in the case of
the US, treaties are only as good as the president and congress of the moment and current
events.


I have provided proof so can you respond with more then smart comments?

@nightcrept.

"Nope i stand by what i said. You have quoted the constitution but you fail to find its
interpretation and implementation."

**Are you cuckoo for cocoa-puffs? I don't need to find interpretations and
implementation. The law is very explicit.

"The geneva convention is a treaty and as such may be broken at anytime by the
president or congress or by any domestic judge who decides to interpret the treaty
how he likes regardless of international law. "

Completely upside down wrong. You don't know what you are talking about.

"To be blunt international treaties are only enforceable so long as it is a weak nation
breaking the treaties. Otherwise it is on the honor system. If the US, china, Russia
etc decided to break the treaty nothing will happen. If the US for instance breaks
the treaty and a federal judge attempts to enforce it the president will just snap his
fingers and cancel the treaty which cannot be done with a domestic law. If the UN
attempts to enforce the treaty on a security council member or ally they or an ally
will veto the effort."

Again, another completely ignoramus answer with zero facts supporting it. Just snap
your fingers. Poof!

"So the fact is the geneva convention is only a treaty and as such nations follow it if
they are too weak to oppose the large central nations who would enforce it or in the
case of the larger nations they can use the treaty. The US and almost all other
larger nations have ignored it at their whim. "

Again, another bullshit answer with zero facts. Just making more stuff up.

"Do you really need examples of nations violating the Geneva convention without
penalty?"

Of course it is silly, you mutter a bunch of nonsensical bull and expect people to
believe it. You are should read a little more. Quit acting like a lawyer, you're not.

LIst:
Three Croatian former generals have gone on trial at the UN war crimes tribunal
accused of the persecution and murder of Croatian Serbs in the 1990s.
Ante Gotovina, Ivan Cermak and Mladen Markac are charged with war crimes and
crimes against humanity including persecution, murder and plunder.
Also; Radovan Karadzic - Yugoslavia, Goran Hadzic - Yugoslavia and Frmr President
Slobadan Milosvic - Yugoslavia (DECEASED)

@ultra

Nope i stand by what i said. You have quoted the constitution but you fail to find its
interpretation and implementation.

The geneva convention is a treaty and as such may be broken at anytime by the president or
congress or by any domestic judge who decides to interpret the treaty how he likes
regardless of international law.

For example.

The Bush administration decided to ignore the treaty in its treatment of non-aligned
prisoners.

Jimmy Carter unilaterally terminated a defense treaty.

And President Bush canceled the ABM treaty in 2002.

I don't see any of them in prison.



This is silly I was going to start posting links to laws and examples of nations including
the US ignoring international law etc but I decided to be horribly blunt even if it brings
out the evil american empire guys.

To be blunt international treaties are only enforceable so long as it is a weak nation
breaking the treaties. Otherwise it is on the honor system. If the US, china, Russia etc
decided to break the treaty nothing will happen. If the US for instance breaks the treaty
and a federal judge attempts to enforce it the president will just snap his fingers and
cancel the treaty which cannot be done with a domestic law. If the UN attempts to enforce
the treaty on a security council member or ally they or an ally will veto the effort.

So the fact is the geneva convention is only a treaty and as such nations follow it if
they are too weak to oppose the large central nations who would enforce it or in the case
of the larger nations they can use the treaty. The US and almost all other larger nations
have ignored it at their whim.

Do you really need examples of nations violating the Geneva convention without penalty?



You actually prove my point by trying to use the Nuremburg trials. The winners always make
the rules and punish the losers. That does not make it right. The same rules used to
punish the Germans at the trials where not for example the same ones used against the
Japanese. The punishments forced on the Germans at the end of WW1 where not at all
righteous. What if Japan or Germany had used nuclear weapons would the allies treated that
as war crimes?

nations have been brought up on charges for
not obeying the geneva convention, do the charges ever amount to anything?
mostly not, but ppl have been charged in violation

Nightcrept: "Treaties such as the geneva convention are international treaties and
not law at all. The geneva convention is more of a honor system between the
nations who signed it and not enforceable as a law. Should the nation you are
fighting not be a signer of the geneva convention or should violate said agreement
the other nation is not required to adhere "

TOTAL NONSENSE.

International Treaties are bound in US law as equal to anything Congress passes.
And in case you forgot about the US Constitution Article VI - "Debts, Supremacy,
Oaths"
..
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in
Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the
Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the
Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws
of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

DID YOU GET THE PART ABOUT TREATIES AND SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND? That is
exactly what it means. Not a nice, maybe, kinda, if I want to obey..sort of law.

In addition, the obligation of signatories of the treaty are obligated, regardless of
enemy, to apply the treaty's rules anyway.

Since you're wrong on everything else, PM Winston Churchill (UK) and Pres.
Roosevelt (US) told Germany during WWII (ref: Winston Churchill "The Second World
War"), , that they were violating the Geneva Convention with their treatment of
troops from USSR and Poland. Germany said that they did not sign the treaty. The
US and UK said that did not matter.

Germany was wrong and the were punished at Nuremburg.


Next time you want to pretend to be the Legal expert on the Geneva Conventions,
try reading them first.

Finally :)

The geneva convention is very tight connected to human rights, that human rights only
apply to the people if it is cheap, we all know.

one of the difficulties about judging if what happened at the capturing/death of osama bin
laden is, that the only source is the us army and the intelligence services, and those
arent kown to be trustworthy.

It would be very advantageous if we still had him alive but said he was dead. Though I
must say that if it where true I would feel very sorry even for him.

LOL Weldon how stupid are u?


Osama Bin Laden is Really dead smart one.


They did a DNA Testing after they killed him.

They did his body and his sister and found match for identical DNA in there blood.



The NavySeals have already done it. So he was proven DEAD.

SO please think again or at least learn or LISTEN on what happend before u say
anymore words like that. ^_^

LMFAO HES NOT DEAD ITS A COVER UP