Geneva Conventions getting US troops killed

James Simpson:

The U.S. military has developed the best system in the world for dealing with combat casualties. As medical technology has advanced, new methods of treatment have been developed, and the speed and efficiency of transport from the battlefield to essential medical services has greatly increased chances for combat wounded to survive. So it is particularly galling that with all these improvements, the U.S. Army has not similarly adjusted its regulations regarding deployment of medical evacuation (medevac) helicopters in combat zones to reflect the realities of modern warfare. It is bad enough that the Obama administration has imposed deadly rules of engagement to hobble the military. The U.S. Army has been racking up its own body count.

A new article in Soldier of Fortune magazine by Dalton Fury, formerDelta Force commander and best-selling author of “Kill Bin Laden,” has explained the problem. Army regulations require that medevac helicopters follow the Geneva Convention, which specifies that they must be unarmed and display prominent red cross markings.

Our popular press has instilled in us the view that, as a signatory nation, we must follow the Geneva Convention in all situations, but this is utterly false. The convention only applies when all parties to the conflict are either signatories, or if not signatories, have nonetheless agreed to follow its tenets.

Given that very specific precondition, the convention requires warring parties to agree regarding aircraft markings, flight routes, altitudes and schedules and that “medical personnel and equipment shall not be attacked, but shall be respected by the belligerents. …” It goes so far as to require medical helicopters to land when the enemy orders them to and even evacuate enemy wounded.

Plainly, the convention speaks to engagements between military powers that respect the rule of law - with the exception of the United States and some of her allies, not a common occurrence over the past 100 years, if ever. But to think that al Qaeda, the Taliban, Hezbollah or any other terrorist group would ever respect the convention is the pinnacle of absurdity. Their military strategy is founded on terrorism, the deliberate flouting of any and all standards of human conduct.

Today we are fighting enemies who mass-murder schoolchildren, behead people with medieval lust, engage in real torture and every imaginable form of barbarity, while camouflaged as civilians to capitalize on rules of engagement that prohibit firing on civilians. While many of these groups are proxy armies for recognized states - some of whom may even have signed the convention - none of those states would ever admit it.

So while bowing to the letter of this ridiculous idea, Army regulations at the same time make a mockery of it. They recognize the true nature of our enemies by forbidding medevac choppers to enter a combat zone without Army gunship escort. If armed escort is not available, medevac helicopters remain grounded, regardless of the emergency.

... 

He gives an example of how the army rules cost lives.

The Geneva Conventions  are basically a contract between the countries who signed on to them.  If the other party to a conflict is not a party or is not abiding by the Conventions, then basic contracts 101 says neither party is bound by the Conventions.  To do otherwise is to create a unilateral contract which is unenforceable.  Only goo-goo liberalism supports such silliness.