Originally Posted by
OUTLAW 09
Azor...here is the thought problem.
There are a number of International Treaties and Agreements that in fact define exactly what "genocide" is as is there a number of International Treaties and Agreements that define "war crimes" as well what is forbidden to be used as weapons of mass destruction against civilians especially the targeting of hospitals.
THEN if we take the National Security Strategy 2015 (unclas) that was publicly released with great fanfare by the Obama WH there is a passage referring to the simple fact that "genocide" is a national security threat.
I linked to this Strategy hundreds of posts ago.
If you are as is Obama a lawyer and you know the international laws, treaties and agreements on "genocide and war crimes" and you fully are "knowledgeable" meaning you have clear, concise and explicit information especially since you get an IC briefing every morning confirming both AND here is the key...you do nothing then in fact one legally can in fact argue that you are "complicit in both the genocide acts and the war crimes".
If you think about it....refer to the article I posted here from 2013 that quoted the "Rhodes WH" and at that time there had only been 100,000 killed and now we are at an estimated 500,000 one might in fact be able to argue your none actions allowed another 400,000 to be killed that otherwise if any form of actions had been taken would still be alive.
Actually a simple logical straight forward thesis.....and sadly it is correct based on international law.
Strangely the UN just ruled IS has committed genocide, BUT has remained totally silent on the Assad genocide, use of starvation, and the Russian use of cluster munitions and WP against civilian targets.......as their actions actually fulfill the UN's own definition of what genocide and war crimes are.......
Genocide is the intentional action to systematically eliminate an ethnic, national, racial, or religious group. The word is a combination of "genos" (race, people) and "cide" (to kill).[1] The United Nations Genocide Convention defines it as "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group".
In 1946, the first session of the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution that "affirmed" that genocide was a crime under international law, but did not provide a legal definition of the crime. In 1948, the UN General Assembly adopted the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG) which defined the crime of genocide for the first time.[15]
The CPPCG was adopted by the UN General Assembly on 9 December 1948 and came into effect on 12 January 1951 (Resolution 260 (III)). It contains an internationally recognized definition of genocide which has been incorporated into the national criminal legislation of many countries, and was also adopted by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, which established the International Criminal Court (ICC). Article II of the Convention defines genocide as:
...any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
I would argue that the ethnic cleansing of Arab Sunni's by actually both Assad and the YPG/SDF/PKK which focuses on Arab Sunni's fulfills the definition.
I would also argue that points; A, B, C, D is fulfilled through the destruction of hospitals and doctors, the forced besieging and starvation and the use of CW, barrel bombs, burning grain fields and Russian use of cluster and WP munitions.
Bookmarks