It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Syrian Sister
Have you heard of something called,
"the geneva conventions".
Originally posted by ArchAngel
Is that the best you could find?
Originally posted by cjf
Here is a start you take it form there…or continue to believe what you believe….it’s really not my problem.
Originally posted by ArchAngel
An American interpretation instead of a document reference?
Originally posted by ArchAngel
The Mosque not all Mosques.
Originally posted by ArchAngel
The author failed to show what article it violates, and ignored the culpability of the occupational forces.
Under international law the improper use of privileged buildings to include churches
and mosques, is a war crime
-[snip]-
Mosques used for military purposes lose protected according to the Law of War
National Review (pdf)
Hague IV Art. 27
"In sieges and bombardments all necessary steps must be taken to spare, as far as possible, buildings dedicated to religion, art, science, or charitable purposes, historic monuments, hospitals, and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not being used at the time for military purposes.
Article 53 also prohibits the use of cultural property “in support of the military effort”—for example, using a national historical building as a command center. In such cases, destruction or damage of cultural property is not necessarily a war crime. The 1954 convention states that the obligation to not harm cultural property “may be waived only in cases where military necessity imperatively requires such a waiver.” The phrase “military necessity” is not defined in the convention, though it would likely apply, for example, to a church damaged during a bombing raid on an adjacent weapons factory, or a museum destroyed because it was being used as an arms depot.
Crimes of War
Originally posted by Wintermorg
bwhahaha i once pissed against a mosque and a friend of mine pooped in front of the door!
Originally posted by SportyMB
Originally posted by Wintermorg
bwhahaha i once pissed against a mosque and a friend of mine pooped in front of the door!
why? mommy didn't potty train you?....sucks to be you.
:shk:
[edit on 12/10/2005 by SportyMB]
Originally posted by Wintermorg
Originally posted by SportyMB
Originally posted by Wintermorg
bwhahaha i once pissed against a mosque and a friend of mine pooped in front of the door!
why? mommy didn't potty train you?....sucks to be you.
:shk:
[edit on 12/10/2005 by SportyMB]
They messed with the wrong guy
Originally posted by Wintermorg
They messed with the wrong guy
Originally posted by boogyman
cjf you're using a strawman argument.
Originally posted by boogyman
The links you are providing cover the destruction of religious sites not their seizure by a military force.
Mosques, like hospitals and schools, are protected by the Geneva Convention. However, the agreement allows mosques and other houses of worship to be targeted for attack if they are being used by an enemy military force "whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization, in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military advantage.
(link)
Originally posted by boogyman
No where have you proven that religious sites lose their status permanently under international law, instead of the more logical assumption that they regain their status after enemy forces have been routed.