tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7506249.post113201747743484381..comments2023-11-05T04:43:31.501-05:00Comments on Kenneth Anderson's Law of War and Just War Theory Blog: My initial reactions to the ICRC Customary International Humanitarian Law StudyUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7506249.post-1132088094752944182005-11-15T15:54:00.000-05:002005-11-15T15:54:00.000-05:00Oops - please change "Heritage Foundation" to Hoov...Oops - please change "Heritage Foundation" to Hoover Institute in my comment above - I'm a bit brain dead today!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7506249.post-1132065084317309632005-11-15T09:31:00.000-05:002005-11-15T09:31:00.000-05:00I think it's great that you're going to discuss th...I think it's great that you're going to discuss this at the Heritage Foundation. Please think carefully about your comments on Rule 106. Despite the U.S. stated objections to relaxing the standards for POW qualifications, which as a practical matter also define the requirements for lawful belligerency, the US in fact supported a resistance movement in Afghanistan for a decade that didn't wear uniforms, more recently supported and coordinated operations with a number of diverse elements of the "Northern Alliance," many of which had no distinctive emblem, and employed a number of US special forces and CIA paramilitary personnel dressed in local native attire.<BR/><BR/>To my reading there are only two possibile results of this pattern -- either U.S. leaders including Ronald Reagan, both Presidents Bush, all current senior U.S. military leaders, etc., etc., are liable for prosecution as war criminals under an aiding and abetting/joint criminal liability scheme or else actual U.S. state practice is to now accept Rule 106 as declaratory of customary international law. I'd be very curious to know if Heritage leadership is willing to go on record calling these folks, who I thought it held in general esteem, as war criminals.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com