Speakeasy forum

General discussion

Edward -- Re: free fire zones

I know this has come up before but darned if I can find it. Can you provide us with some info on this and whether or not this is a "war crime" as asserted by Kerry? TIA!

Evie Happy

Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: Edward -- Re: free fire zones
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: Edward -- Re: free fire zones
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
Re: Edward -- Re: free fire zones

In reply to: Edward -- Re: free fire zones

Hi, Evie.

I'm not Ed, but he'll argue that it isn't. Here's a letter from Human Rights Watch (an international organization not affiliated with any domestic political groups) giving chapter and verse citations from the Geneva Conventions on the issue.

-- Dave K.
Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

Collapse -
Re: free fire zones P.S.

In reply to: Re: Edward -- Re: free fire zones

Note also that this was written in 2001, long before Kerry's charges became a political issue.

-- Dave K.
Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

Collapse -
You for real with this part Dave?

In reply to: Re: free fire zones P.S.

The Kerry stuff had been brewing for three decades by then.

Evie Happy

Collapse -
(NT) (NT) No Dave, it was 30 years AFTER becoming an issue

In reply to: Re: free fire zones P.S.

Collapse -
Re: Edward -- Re: free fire zones

In reply to: Edward -- Re: free fire zones

when i was in country free fire zones were just that if you saw movement and did the normal BS of making sure wasn't friendlies you shoot.

then when back at base camp and on friggan guard duty if you saw movement in the wire you had to Call in for permission to fire like a friendlies gonna be crawling threw the wire.

by the time you got permision if you did that bs you were hit my rpgs.
so lets get reilistic about war.

Collapse -
You needed to have been there.......

In reply to: Re: Edward -- Re: free fire zones

....to be realistic.

Arm chairing in front a computer war game only makes
one an "expert".

Collapse -
Re: You needed to have been there.......

In reply to: You needed to have been there.......

del i did 2 full tours in country Grin

Collapse -
(NT) (NT) I get it :-)

In reply to: You needed to have been there.......

Collapse -
Sure

In reply to: Edward -- Re: free fire zones

I see that Dave has tried the "Human Watch" BS again despite showing him last time he brought it up that is is imaginative BS.

The 4th Convention can be located here and each of the articles cited in the Human Watch article can be located and refused based on the whole of the Convention.

They cite Art 27, 32 and 146 as their main "proofs".

Art 27 has a provision they completely ignore - "However, the Parties to the conflict may take such measures of control and security in regard to protected persons as may be necessary as a result of the war." This allows such things as incarceration or forced relocation if deemed necessary. Such relocations were commonplace BEFORE declaring areas as Free Fire Zones. (Articles 41, 42, 49 and 78 spell this out and some of the reasons requiring it.)

Art 32 is more of the same and again relocation was used to protect the persons.

Art 146 concerns investigation procedures for alleged actives that breech the concept of protection of Civilian Persons in time of war. Alleged cases were investigated.

Article 4 again is less than adequately addressed in the Human Watch article as again they ignore what is inconvenient to their thesis and that is that "Persons protected by the Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field of 12 August 1949, or by the Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea of 12 August 1949, or by the Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War of 12 August 1949, shall not be considered as protected persons within the meaning of the present Convention." Again, the relocation of civilians was a protection that, in a gurilla environment, allows the presumption that those found in the area later are covered by a different Convention dealing not with civilians but with combatants.

Article 14 provides for the creation of zones (not just Hospital and Safety zones either) and Free Fire Zones are one type.

Article 147 in its last paragraph addresses criminal acts but in each and every instance MILITARY NECESSITY trumps (this is why allowable collateral damage is a consideration of importance--it is driven by military necessity). Freefire zones were established for DISCRIMINATE ATTACK for military purposes and preservation rather than indiscriminate attack as Human Watch and Kerry would have one believe.

Regardless of the declaration of zones however general orders held that one fired on only those carrying observable weapons or engaged in suspicious activies of a militant nature (such as moving or concealing supplies). Matter of fact the in addition to a Status of forces card everyone had one that said in part "?use your firepower with care and discrimination, particularly in populated areas.? "

Collapse -
(NT) (NT) Thanks :-)

In reply to: Sure

Popular Forums

icon
Computer Newbies 10,686 discussions
icon
Computer Help 54,365 discussions
icon
Laptops 21,181 discussions
icon
Networking & Wireless 16,313 discussions
icon
Phones 17,137 discussions
icon
Security 31,287 discussions
icon
TVs & Home Theaters 22,101 discussions
icon
Windows 7 8,164 discussions
icon
Windows 10 2,657 discussions

GRAMMYS 2019

Here's Everything to Know About the 2019 Grammys

Find out how to watch the Grammy Awards if you don't have cable and more.