See You In The Hague

How ridiculous is this?

Six hundred million gamers could be war criminals, Red Cross says

THE Red Cross is investigating whether 600 million gamers are violating the Hague and Geneva conventions when they kill and blow stuff up for fun.

Delegates at the 31st International Conference of the Red Cross (ICRC) and Red Crescent raised the concerns over the potential “International Humanitarian Law” violations – which can constitute war crimes – during a workshop in Geneva.

“Exactly how video games influence individuals is a hotly debated topic, but for the first time, Movement partners discussed our role and responsibility to take action against violations of IHL in video games,” the Red Cross wrote in its daily bulletin.

See also:
Could Playing Videogames Be a War Crime?
Red Cross: 600m videogamers may be war criminals
War Crimes in Video Games Draw Red Cross Scrutiny
Are You a Video Game War Criminal?
Red Cross Investigating Virtual War Crimes
Red Cross Would Like Rules of War Applied to Video Games [Updated]
Red Cross: Violent video games violate international law
The Red Cross and Six Hundred Million Hague Convention Violations
Should the Geneva Conventions Be Applied to Video Games?
Should video games respect international war crimes law?
Red Cross vows not to prosecute video gamers for war crimes
Gamers are safe from war crimes prosecution
Red Cross: Gamers safe from war crimes prosecution

Whew, well, it’s good to know that the ICRC isn’t going to prosecute video gamers, so we dodged a bullet there. However, it’s incredibly troubling and well beyond insane that they’re even thinking about it. If you’re thinking about donating to the Red Cross this holiday season remember, there’s a huge difference between the American Red Cross and the International Red Cross.

/the former does good and important relief work, while the latter is just plain bat[expletive deleted] crazy

Advertisements

Obama War Number Four

Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and now Uganda, for someone who’s won the Nobel Peace Prize, Obama sure seems to have an insatiable bloodlust for military adventurism and intervention. I thought he was elected to end U.S. involvement in overseas wars, not double it.

Obama sending American soldiers to Uganda to aid fight against Lord’s Resistance Army

President Obama has deployed a small contingent of elite troops to aid Ugandan government forces battling a murderous insurgent group.

The first troops departed for the Central African nation Wednesday, part of a complement that will total about 100 American soldiers.

They’ll assist in the fight against the Lord’s Resistance Army, Obama wrote in a letter to Congressional leaders.

“Although the U.S. forces are combat-equipped, they will only be providing information, advice, and assistance to partner nation forces, and they will not themselves engage LRA forces unless necessary for self-defense,” Obama said.

See also:
Obama sends 100 US troops to Uganda to fight LRA
Uganda To Receive 100 U.S Military Advisors
US troops arrive to ‘kill or capture’ Kony
White House: US advisers to aid fight against infamous Lord’s Resistance Army
Political payback behind US special forces deployment to Uganda?
Why send US troops against African bush fighters? Political payback for Somalia a possibility
Uganda president: US troops not sent in to fight
Obama risks miring US in an African war: McCain
Uganda welcomes US troops to hunt rebel leaders
Africa deployment draws support, warning
Rights Groups Welcome US Decision to Send Troops to Uganda
U.S. Ventures into Bloody Uganda Conflict
What US manhunt for LRA leaders reveals about Obama’s war strategy
Joseph Kony and the Lord’s Resistance Army: a primer
The Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA)
Lord’s Resistance Army
Joseph Kony
Uganda
Uganda

Did I miss the memo explaining exactly how events in Uganda are a threat to vital U.S. national security interests or is this, like Libya, just another Obama and Samantha Power “Responsibility to Protect (R2P)” military excursion extravaganza? I suspect it’s the latter and if we have a R2P civilians in Uganda, where no vital U.S. national security interests are at stake, why the [expletive deleted] aren’t we intervening in Syria, where thousands of civilians have been killed and the rogue Assad regime clearly has U.S. blood on its hands?

/all I can say is there had better not be any escalation, mission creep, or U.S. lives lost in this potential Obama military misadventure, kill Kony and get the [expletive deleted] out