- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
Certainly, these clowns who got caught up in the ongoing war had the tacit approval of certain quasi-governmental entities.
If the combatants are caught up in technical definitions, then yes, they are unlawful in that the Geneva Convention treats war as something between nations or states.
But were that definition extended to cover large conspiratorial bodies that do not have a dedicated geographically defined home (free agents on behalf of host governments, for one example) then they would certainly be in a better position to be treated with some humanity.
The question is not so much the definition. These guys were fighting for, in their belief, the improvement of situations in their homelands, even if not directly for their host governments.
A civilized world would treat these guys like any warring enemies rather than trying to let them fall through the cracks, because in this war, as in any, part of the victory lies in the world public opinion, the psychology, of the methods in which the two warring sides fought the war.
If the bully can be made to look decrepit and uncivilized, then the victory, to a great extent, is already granted to the opposition by world opinion-- David vs the Evil Goliath.
