Why can't Al-Jazeera show pics of coalition POW's?

[Nemesis77]

US and people in general have complained that displaying coalition POW's on TV is wrong and against the Geneva convention (altrough USA doesn't follow that convention in Camp X-ray either, but I digress). They have also said that showing dead coalition troops is wrong.

So why is it then OK to show surrendering/surrendered Iraqi troops on TV? Why is it OK to show pics of dead Iraqis? Seriously, why?

 

[Fencer128]

Originally posted by: Nemesis77
US and people in general have complained that displaying coalition POW's on TV is wrong and against the Geneva convention (altrough USA doesn't follow that convention in Camp X-ray either, but I digress). They have also said that showing dead coalition troops is wrong.

So why is it then OK to show surrendering/surrendered Iraqi troops on TV? Why is it OK to show pics of dead Iraqis? Seriously, why?

Your right in that the best idea is not to show them from either side. If they have to be shown why can't their faces be pixelated just like in the cases of some alleged criminals?

Cheers,

Andy

 

Stop posting and read a history book.

 

[Nemesis77]

Originally posted by: Roger
Stop posting and read a history book.

I ask again: Why is it wrong to show coalition POW's on TV, but it's not wrong to show Iraqi POW's on TV?

 

[joohang]

Originally posted by: Nemesis77

Originally posted by: Roger
Stop posting and read a history book.

I ask again: Why is it wrong to show coalition POW's on TV, but it's not wrong to show Iraqi POW's on TV?

The Coalition already clearly broke the Geneva Convention by showing the POWs on TV. If they continue to do so, they don't have much ground to demand Saddam to follow the Convention as well, no?

Edit: Let me check on that one myself since I read that off a news source and didn't check against the actual clauses.

 

Al-Jazeera is not interested in showing Iraqi POWs being treated fairly, getting there three hots and a cot. They would rather show American POWs with bullet holes in their heads from being executed.

 

[Alistar7]

What US GOVT CONTROLLED TV station has aired POW's?, you do realize private companies do not have to abide....

Saddam has forced civilians into the line of fire, executed those who refused to fight or tried surrender, dressed military in civilian clothing, used a hospital as a base, hides his troops and equipment in residential and internatioanl historic sites, uses human shields, and uses his STATE CONTROLLED TV to air POW's, including identifying features, bodies not being treated with the proper respect, etc....

What has the US done to violate the geneva convention? Iraqi soldiers get better treatment, food, and medical care from us than from Saddam.....

 

[AntaresVI]

al-jezeera is teh suck

 

[Conky]

Originally posted by: joohang

Originally posted by: Nemesis77

Originally posted by: Roger
Stop posting and read a history book.

I ask again: Why is it wrong to show coalition POW's on TV, but it's not wrong to show Iraqi POW's on TV?

The Coalition already clearly broke the Geneva Convention by showing the POWs on TV. If they continue to do so, they don't have much ground to demand Saddam to follow the Convention as well, no?

Edit: Let me check on that one myself since I read that off a news source and didn't check against the actual clauses.

It's not about showing them on TV. It's about humiliating and killing them. Read the link Roger posted.

 

[Nitemare]

Don't have a problem with them showing the POW's, just the 5 minutes before in which they put a gun to their comrades heads and pulled the trigger that I have the problem with.

Kind of reminds me of the Assyrian days when they used to torture their enemies and place their heads on spears...this would inspire their enemies to fear them and fight with half a heart thus making their battles easier.

Instead it will make our soldiers more determined to capture this madman and others that think like them and exterminate him like the PoS that he is.

 

[Nemesis77]

Originally posted by: Nitemare
Don't have a problem with them showing the POW's, just the 5 minutes before in which they put a gun to their comrades heads and pulled the trigger that I have the problem with.

I have seen two groups of US POWs being shown on TV: the two apache-pilots, and the group of soldiers with the woman among them. Do you know that they have been killed? Where do you get your info that Iraq has killed the POW's they showed on TV?

And my point is the official whining from the US government. That showing POW's on TV is a violation of the Geneva convention. And still western media happily shows Iraqi POW's on tv and no-ona says a word about that.

As to "humiliating POWs". I haven't seen that. All I saw was the POW's being shown on tv and the reporter asked them some questions. It's not like they made them crawl on ground or something.

And before you ask: Yes, I think it is wrong to show the US and UK POW's on tv. But I think the same applies to the Iraqi POWs as well.

 

[conjur]

The Iraqi POWs have been shown on TV as the media encounters them out in the battlefield.

The US/UK media weren't led to a room to interview/interrogate the POWs and broadcast it on a state-run station!

HUGE difference!

 

[Nitemare]

Maybe we should send cnn over there and do some close ups of all the dead Iraqi's. We could open up their shirts to display their gaping wounds, drag them around stacking them up like cord wood...


Ohhh..I forgot we were a civilized people.

 

[exp]

As to "humiliating POWs". I haven't seen that. All I saw was the POW's being shown on tv and the reporter asked them some questions. It's not like they made them crawl on ground or something.

Televised interviews like that very clearly fall under "humiliating POWs" as specified by the Geneva convention. Look, I know you hate the U.S., but in this case you should realize that the U.S is not the only one "whining" about a supposed Iraqi offense--the ICRC has also said as much. The complaint is legitimate.

FWIW, I do agree that Iraqi POW's should not be shown either, *especially* not in a way that they can be identified. American news channels are way out of line here. They may not have violated the Geneva convention (conjur mentioned the difference, from a legal standpoint) but their coverage still falls under the category of "tasteless and insensitive" IMO.

 

[Oakenfold]

Does Al-Jazeera have a website?

 

[StormRider]

I don't mind them showing our POWs on TV as long as we are not seeing them being executed or tortured (like the Daniel Pearl video). I think showing them actually increases their chances of survival -- because the eyes of the world is now on them. If something happens to them then the world will know.

I'm worried about the ones we don't see -- the ones that are listed as missing in action. The Iraqis can do anything to them and the world will never know.

 

[43st]

Iraq doesn't own Al Jazeera guys. It's a private company just like CNN. So it's not a "HUGE" difference.

 

[ManSnake]

Originally posted by: StormRider
I don't mind them showing our POWs on TV as long as we are not seeing them being executed or tortured (like the Daniel Pearl video). I think showing them actually increases their chances of survival -- because the eyes of the world is now on them. If something happens to them then the world will know.

I'm worried about the ones we don't see -- the ones that are listed as missing in action. The Iraqis can do anything to them and the world will never know.

Exactly! Visibility is always good for the survival of our boys.

 

[rahvin]

Originally posted by: Nemesis77
US and people in general have complained that displaying coalition POW's on TV is wrong and against the Geneva convention (altrough USA doesn't follow that convention in Camp X-ray either, but I digress). They have also said that showing dead coalition troops is wrong.

So why is it then OK to show surrendering/surrendered Iraqi troops on TV? Why is it OK to show pics of dead Iraqis? Seriously, why?

No one should show any identifiable POW's on TV. Private news channels should be punished for showing the images (including US channels). Government controlled interviewers of POW's, government controlled station managers and heads of state should be tried for War Crimes for production, distribution and ordering the display in violation of the geneva convention.

 

[RanDum72]

Iraq doesn't own Al Jazeera guys. It's a private company just like CNN. So it's not a "HUGE" difference.

Exactly. Its is owned by Qatar and is an independent-minded news organization, much like CNN. They will also show the bad side of the Arab world just as much as they will show anything else. To me, the whole thing is about 'spin'. The West, whining about about 'Geneva Conevention' and other stuff, is just as guilty of 'spin' as the Iraqi's. Why whine about it when they created the situation in the first place by invading Iraq, a move clearly opposed by the rest of the world? Its propaganda warfare, both sides can say whatever they want.

 

[zer0burn]

i dont know if its been said but theres a huge difference. You can show pow's however you are not allowed to question them infront of cameras and embarass them

 

[RanDum72]

dont know if its been said but theres a huge difference. You can show pow's however you are not allowed to question them infront of cameras and embarass them

How, exactly, were they emabarassed? They were shown sitting down, they were asked questions and they answered with their name, number, and where they came from. Thats it. They weren't slapped, beaten up or forced to undress in front of the cameras. As somebody has mentioned, more good than harm can come out of their being shown alive in TV.

 

[zer0burn]

that is being embarassed especially when your wounded in the stomach and forced to situp...

 

[zer0burn]

heres just a few of the things they've broken

(c) Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment;

(d) The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.

2. The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for. Now maybe you think that caring for the wounded involves forcing them to an interview while hes been bleeding from the stomach...

 

[RanDum72]

The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.

Now again, these are just allegations by the coalition forces and has yet to be fully confirmed. Its mostly 'spin' so far. Just like the claim that there was an 'uprising' in Basra against the Iraqi forces. But independent Arab journalists who were actually inside the city said that there was nothing of the sort at all. They all talk about the 'rules of war'. This is stupid. War is war. There are no rules as far as the Iraqi's are concerned. The Geneva convention was established by the international community. This is the same international community the U.S. has choosen to ignore in order to invade Iraq.