"effective alternative to the bombing "

[Doug Millison]

http://argument.independent.co.uk/commentators/story.jsp?story=99442

"Over the past decade or so, every war fought by the West (in the Gulf, the
Balkans and now South Asia) has been accompanied by a well-orchestrated
propaganda campaign. Politics is conducted and presented in the style of
intelligence agencies: disinformation, exaggeration of enemy strength and
capability, explanation of a television image with a brazen lie and
censorship. The aim is to delude and disarm the citizenry. Everything is
either over-simplified or reduced to a wearisome incomprehensibility. The
message is simple. There is no alternative. [...]

"The fact is that the Anglo-American bombing campaign is in clear breach of
Articles 48 and 51 of the Geneva Convention as well as the Nuremberg
Charter. Article 48 insists that: "In order to ensure respect for and
protection of the civilian population and civilian objects, the Parties to
the conflict shall at all times distinguish between the civilian population
and combatants and between civilian objects and military objectives and
accordingly shall direct their operations only against military objectives."

Article 51 is equally clear in prohibiting indiscriminate attacks and
specifies these as attacks "which may be expected to cause incidental loss
of a civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects or a
combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete
and direct military advantage anticipated". [...]

" If the real intention was not a crude war of revenge, but to seriously
weaken and eliminate terrorism and bring to trial those who ordered the
crimes committed on 11 September, then the answer is yes. The
disproportionality of what is taking place speaks for itself. If the US
judiciary was convinced by the evidence of Mr bin Laden's guilt then a
warrant should have been issued for his extradition and a plan prepared to
bring him to trial.

A lesson could have been learnt from Israel's patient stalking, capture and
trial of Adolf Eichmann who was accused of a far more serious crime. In
going to war, Bush and Blair resorted to a mixture of cowboy discourse and
Old Testament imagery to pre-empt any judicial inquiry or action. [...]

"If the real aim is simply an old-fashioned imperialist one, i.e. to topple
the Taliban regime and replace it with a protectorate considered closer to
"Western values" (as the Taliban once was), then and only then does the
bombing make sense as the Northern Alliance, waiting to commence the battle
for Kabul, realise full well. Its leaders boast they can do it alone, but
US marines and British commandos are standing by to help them just in case
the Taliban defeat them as they did once before. [...]"