“This site is dedicated to preying on peoples vanity, ignorance, or loneliness, gaining their trust and betraying them without remorse.”

Friday, January 22, 2010

Obama the Unilateralist

This is really choice!


Obama's Plan May Fail European Test

By SIMON NIXON WSJ

President Obama is making a habit of springing financial surprises. His latest plan to stop certain banks from trading on their own account or investing in hedge funds and private equity follows last week's announcement of a bank wholesale-funding levy. Despite repeated efforts by European governments to engage the U.S. in a global financial-overhaul agenda, both proposals appear to have been launched unilaterally without consultation with international partners.

Nonetheless, Mr. Obama's plans have had global repercussions. European bank stocks sold off following the announcement, with Barclays, the biggest decliner, down more than 10%. But this may be an overreaction. To the extent it is possible to guess what will emerge from Mr. Obama's two-paragraph plan, European banks don't look particularly vulnerable. Few take U.S. deposits or have access to the Federal Reserve discount window, making it hard to see how they could be caught by the new rules.

Many, including UBS, Credit Suisse Group, Deutsche Bank and Royal Bank of Scotland Group, already have largely exited proprietary trading. None are big investors in hedge funds, although some such as Deutsche Bank and Barclays continue to invest in private equity. Barclays probably is the most active in proprietary trading, but it is likely to account for less than 5% of group revenue, according to UBS.

Mr. Obama's plans to limit the size of banks and curb their use of wholesale funding, both through caps on funding and a proposed levy, may be a bigger threat to European banks, if adopted globally. True, there is no clarity on how these proposals might work in practice. Wholesale funding can take many forms, and how one measures market share of liabilities is unclear. But a global levy along the lines outlined by Mr. Obama could cost Barclays roughly half its forecast 2011 profit before tax, according to Credit Suisse.

Mr. Obama's vague plans have created uncertainty for the banking sector and, by fueling the populist backlash, heightened the regulatory risk for the whole industry. Mr. Obama's proposals may mark the start of a global debate on how to tackle the problems raised by too-big-to-fail banks, leading to a coherent international overhaul agenda.

Just as likely, Mr. Obama, by politicizing the debate and pinning his colors to one plan of action, may instead have pulled the rug from under his potential allies, making global agreement harder to achieve. No European country is likely to follow Mr. Obama's lead without global agreement. That would open up the prospect of new opportunities for regulatory arbitrage from which European banks may yet be winners.




121 comments:

  1. Threads shredded by prolific posts.

    Doug said...

    "Polls show that the more the public learns about the CIA's interrogation program, the more Americans support it."

    Quirk said...

    "Another sad commentary on America."

    Doug said...

    "What the Hell does that mean?"

    Quirk said...

    "It means they're full of shit. In my opinion of course."

    Doug says...
    Why?
    Please explain.

    ReplyDelete
  2. No brainer here. 77% of U.S. Investors see Obama as Anti-Business

    He has fallen to below 50 percent in the poll approval ratings.

    Climategate was the tip of the non-melting iceberg. NOAA and NASA fudged the data too. I'm sure the Elephant Bar's lib apologists will think of something to explain this, like "The American Thinker is owned by Big Oil".

    ReplyDelete
  3. Click to enlarge
    1 of 1
    New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is less than thrilled with President Barack Obama's plan to limit the size of banks and their investments.
    Bryan Smith-Pool/Getty Images
    Related Slideshows

    Celebs Who Lean To The Right 2009 Celebrity Deaths Celebrity Real Names...Revealed! Celebrities In Playboy Best Picture Blunders Celebrities Turning 40 In 2010 Hottest Celebrity Moms World's Most Useless Facts Jessica Simpson: Then & Now Megan Fox -- Then & Now
    Related Stories

    Obama Calls For Tougher Bank Regulation
    (1/21/2010)
    President Barack Obama's demand Thursday that Congress clamp down on the size of banks and their investments got major blowback from New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who said it could cause layoffs and hurt the city.

    It's a clash between the president and the mayor. President Obama wants to whittle away at the size of the financial services industry.

    "The American people will not be served by a financial system that comprises just a few massive firms," the president said.

    But Mayor Bloomberg said the banks and Wall Street are part of the bedrock of the city's economy, and efforts to slash their business just means less tax revenue for the city, which brings up the dreaded "L" word.

    "If that's the case then we'll have to lay off people because it will really hurt our industry," Bloomberg said.

    The mayor was so upset about the move -- and a suggestion that Wall Street bonuses be put in escrow, which means the money wouldn't be spent here, wouldn't help the city economy -- he responded with a proposal of his own for members of Congress.

    "Maybe we should hold back their salaries for a decade or so and see whether the laws they pass work out," Bloomberg said.

    The mayor also demanded that the members of our congressional delegation go to the mat to protect the financial services industry, much like senators from Texas protect the oil industry.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Obama is quite the job creating machine.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "Doug says...
    Why?
    Please explain."


    It should be obvious. Torture is torture, whether you call it torture or an enhanced interrogation technique.

    I think the country is better than that.

    .

    ReplyDelete
  6. "It's a clash between the president and the mayor. President Obama wants to whittle away at the size of the financial services industry.

    "The American people will not be served by a financial system that comprises just a few massive firms," the president said.
    "

    ---
    Immediately following the unprecedented transfer of wealth to this "financial system" by this Demigod's Administration.

    ReplyDelete
  7. New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is less than thrilled with President Barack Obama's plan to limit the size of banks and their investments.


    Obama Calls For Tougher Bank Regulation
    (1/21/2010)

    President Barack Obama's demand Thursday that Congress clamp down on the size of banks and their investments got major blowback from New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who said it could cause layoffs and hurt the city.

    It's a clash between the president and the mayor. President Obama wants to whittle away at the size of the financial services industry.

    "The American people will not be served by a financial system that comprises just a few massive firms," the president said.

    But Mayor Bloomberg said the banks and Wall Street are part of the bedrock of the city's economy, and efforts to slash their business just means less tax revenue for the city, which brings up the dreaded "L" word.

    "If that's the case then we'll have to lay off people because it will really hurt our industry," Bloomberg said.

    The mayor was so upset about the move -- and a suggestion that Wall Street bonuses be put in escrow, which means the money wouldn't be spent here, wouldn't help the city economy -- he responded with a proposal of his own for members of Congress.

    "Maybe we should hold back their salaries for a decade or so and see whether the laws they pass work out," Bloomberg said.

    The mayor also demanded that the members of our congressional delegation go to the mat to protect the financial services industry, much like senators from Texas protect the oil industry.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Do you favor mirandizing terrorists, Quirk?

    Is training endured by many of our troops torture?

    Which would you choose, waterboarding, or Mary Jo Kopechne's fate?

    Teddy rode that high horse to his grave.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Was my wargas experience in Basic Training torture?
    Should it be outlawed?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Should thousands of innocents die to preserve the "rights" of pathological terrorist scumbags?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Did you vote for BHO?
    If not, why not?

    ReplyDelete
  12. KSM became the most prolific source of useful Intel, saving uncounted lives, and refining our understanding of the enemy we face.

    He's in favor of the treatment he received.

    Who are we to argue?

    ReplyDelete
  13. " Doug said...
    Do you favor mirandizing terrorists, Quirk?

    Is training endured by many of our troops torture?

    Which would you choose, waterboarding, or Mary Jo Kopechne's fate?

    Teddy rode that high horse to his grave.

    Fri Jan 22, 01:19:00 PM EST


    Doug said...
    Was my wargas experience in Basic Training torture?
    Should it be outlawed?

    Fri Jan 22, 01:20:00 PM EST


    Doug said...
    Should thousands of innocents die to preserve the "rights" of pathological terrorist scumbags?

    Fri Jan 22, 01:22:00 PM EST


    Doug said...
    Did you vote for BHO?
    If not, why not?"



    Non-sequiters, red herrings, bluster. If you're actually interested in talking about the subject of torture, I'll be glad to do it. If you're only interested in your usual mindless venting, you waste my time.


    .

    ReplyDelete
  14. IOW, a few clever words excuse you from responding?
    They excuse you in your mind, not mine.

    ReplyDelete
  15. As I thought.

    (By the way, do the capital letters mean you are really, really, really, really upset?

    Or, just one too many pina coladas and you left the caps lock on?)

    .

    ReplyDelete
  16. FROM LAST THREAD


    Newsflash...

    Americans are rushing north of the border for healthcare "services". It was recently found out, by this reporter 1st hand, that in Canada massages with a happy ending, hand jobs and lapdances are all considered "health care" and thus Americans (with their Visa cards) are stampeding north to "get off"

    ReplyDelete
  17. "They excuse you in your mind, not mine."

    Your mind?

    The initial subject was enhanced interrogation techniques.

    What does who I voted for or Mary Ann Kopeckne and Ted Kennedy have to do with that?

    As for my being a moron? Hell Doug, I've been called worse. Try again.


    .

    .

    ReplyDelete
  18. Deuce said...
    Obama is quite the job creating machine.


    Think of all the hookers who he is creating jobs for!

    ReplyDelete
  19. I am for torture of any islamic terrorist caught alive...

    I am not talking waterboarding...

    I am talking pig fat dipping, leg breaking, dirty tampon flinging, koran flushing torture...

    yep, I am an asshole...

    I can live with that

    ReplyDelete
  20. You're a worthless waste of time, as is Ash.
    Rufus is still pending.

    ReplyDelete
  21. "The initial subject was enhanced interrogation techniques."
    ---
    ...and you have evaded discussion of the issue.
    For reasons only you, at present, know.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I don't think we (the Army or the CIA) should torture people, but I don't have a problem with outsourcing it, especially if the interviewee is remanded to his own Muslim brothers.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Pending?!!!!

    PENDING!????


    I'LL GIVE YOU PENDING,, You PINEAPPLE-HEADED, SONIA-STALKING, EX-PATRIOT LOON!!!

    :)

    Did'ja miss me?

    ReplyDelete
  24. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Thread as often as you please. They are never dull.

    Wow! It is now 14:35 and two threads have managed to survive, unsullied by you know what.

    This could be a red-letter day.

    As I said in an earlier thread, Mr. Obama may be tbe best thing to happen for the Republicans since the Mr. Clinton of 1992. By Jove, at his present rate of alienation, the hapless Pups may end 2012 with a super-majority and the presidency. That is not to imply that the Repubs would know what to do in such a case.

    Mr. Obama is either tone deaf or a wholly unredeemable true believer in the Marxian model of social engineering.

    Had Mr. Obama initially federalized the banks, given a $15,000.00 tax credit to all comers and sponsored accelerated depreciation, he might have made a difference. Instead, I believe 2010 may end as the worst year since the financial disintegration started.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I guess the Global Cooling has been especially hard on Sonia.

    ReplyDelete
  27. What is it about SONIA-STALKING that is wrong?

    ReplyDelete
  28. "I believe 2010 may end as the worst year since the financial disintegration started."

    Definitely a possibility that a double dip will occur! As to laying blame at Obama's feet...I dunno. Krugman says damn the torpedoes and plow full steam ahead with more stimulus. Protectionism and a monetary contraction seem more in tune with the sentiments of "the people".

    ReplyDelete
  29. At least with Bobal's MLD STALKING MeLoDy left much more to the imagination.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Yeah, like what the fuck sense did it make for two married people to interact like that?
    Compounded by Bob's poetry.

    ReplyDelete
  31. In public of course.
    Our private lives remain private,
    until they are outted.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Lilith said...
    I don't think we (the Army or the CIA) should torture people, but I don't have a problem with outsourcing it, especially if the interviewee is remanded to his own Muslim brothers.

    I stand corrected...

    outsource the pricks to their own muslim brothers, they use red hot iron pokers, wood chippers, spouse and children rape...

    we'll on second thought, my version of torture is almost "mickey mouse kingdom" compared to what the jordanians, saudis or pakis do...

    ReplyDelete
  33. "...and you have evaded discussion of the issue.
    For reasons only you, at present, know."


    Your initial question was why I thought polls showing the country moving towards more acceptance of "enhanced techniques" was a sad commentary on the country. I gave you my reason.

    I repeat:

    "It should be obvious. Torture is torture, whether you call it torture or an enhanced interrogation technique.

    I think the country is better than that."

    Now, if you want to talk about other specific issues associated with this subject fine. But don't bore me with silly rants about Mary Ann Kopeckne or who I voted for.


    .


    .

    ReplyDelete
  34. Blah, blah, blah.
    Is waterboarding torture?
    Should it be used?
    Yes, or no, no extended frilly verbiage required.

    ReplyDelete
  35. I'm the one accused of rants.

    You're the one that has required ten posts without adding additional information to the argument.

    ReplyDelete
  36. I'm for waterboarding All Hawaiians.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Or, maybe that was "Some" Canadians, and ALL Kansans?

    ReplyDelete
  38. Spies Like Us:

    "Talk, or we start cutting off fingers!"

    "Yours or mine?"

    ReplyDelete
  39. How about we just make it Doug, and Ash?

    ReplyDelete
  40. "But don't bore me with silly rants about Mary Ann Kopeckne or who I voted for."

    I get it:
    Poking you in hopes of eliciting an honest answer is TORTURE!

    Well pardon me for offending your tender psyche.
    I "should be better than that."

    ReplyDelete
  41. Ash,

    Re: double dip recession

    Ash, with respect, the US has not yet completed its first dip.

    As this is written, 20% of the commercial space in Atlanta is going begging.

    I have 13 acres of the best commercial land in middle Georgia for sale. Yesterday, I talked with a friend my Sweetie (he's one of the most successful ophthalmologists in the South) about the possibility of a satellite office on the property. As things stand now, he gets tons of referrals from my area, who must drive all the way to Atlanta for service. His take, "I don't know anyone who is willing to risk investing in this climate. No one knows what the government is going to do next."

    If you have seen the 2010 numbers on soon to be hitting the skids, "troubled" commercial real estate, you have no cause for optimism.

    ReplyDelete
  42. "Blah, blah, blah.
    Is waterboarding torture?
    Should it be used?"


    Finally, a rational post.

    Yes.

    No.

    .

    ReplyDelete
  43. You should be better than that, also, Rufus!
    For Shame!

    ReplyDelete
  44. I gotta rethink the "Hawayuns," though.

    How would you ever "clean up" the water?

    The Pacific Ocean can only do "So much."

    ReplyDelete
  45. Yeah, Quirk,
    And no answer to my SPECIFIC question.
    What a 'tard.

    ReplyDelete
  46. It is torture and it should be used?

    ReplyDelete
  47. I going to take a nap, before Doug gets up off the carpet.

    ReplyDelete
  48. I going to get up of da carpet before Rufus take nap.

    ReplyDelete
  49. allen wrote:

    "Ash, with respect, the US has not yet completed its first dip."

    It certainly appears as if real estate has continued its downward trend in the US (Canada has fared remarkably well so far) and the Stock Markets have had a good run the last year but I believe, technically, the recession ended awhile back.

    In any case I share your pessimism for the near term future. I hope we are wrong though 'cause I'm tired of the grind I'm experiencing in my business.

    ReplyDelete
  50. "It is torture and it should be used?"

    From the question mark, I assume you are trying to say "Is it torture and should it be used?"; the questionyou asked previously. (Although with you Doug it's often dangerous to assume.)

    I have to ask are you having trouble reading too? (You might want to try Whit's suggestion about the Ctrl and + and - keys)

    You asked that question before and requested a "Yes, or no, no extended frilly verbiage required."

    I gave you my answers.

    Yes.

    and

    No.

    No frilly verbiage.

    Are we having trouble keeping up today Doug?

    .

    ReplyDelete
  51. Ash,

    Whether the recession "technically" ended some time ago depends on whose numbers are used.

    As you are aware, on the question of the actual unemployment level, the Feds are off by, what, 80%? Real unemployment/underemployment is close to 17-18%. Heretofore reliable business writers have resorted, in many cases, to fluff, contradicting themselves in mid-paragraph, literally.

    My advice, were I asked, would be to develop a new business paradigm for the different reality we are going to experience for years to come. The rate of personnel attrition last year at my brokerage was in the range of 2-3% per month. Those without reserves and adaptability are falling by the wayside.

    This will not be over until the fat lady sings. At the moment she isn't even near the theater.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Quirk,
    Obviously you missed my answer
    @ - Fri Jan 22, 03:25:00 PM EST

    To repeat:
    Bye

    ReplyDelete
  53. I do appreciate the demonstrations of ad hominems from on high, defense tho.

    Making a distinction w/o a difference in one's own mind.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Ash,

    Without resort to the accusations of either malice or duplicity, I do not believe that those at the helm fully understand the depth of the problem facing them. Most have never faced the threat of defeat and oblivion. In a bipartisan fashion, all would have us believe it possible to return to the halcyon days of yesteryear, with the skillful application of just the right stimuli. Ain't gonna happen; that dance is done.

    None of this is to suggest that the US will become a third-world country in the next decade. I do suggest that our two decade long role as the sole power in the world is at an end. Our creditors are going to want repayment, and the vault is filled with IOUs.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Quirk,
    Obviously you missed my answer
    @ - Fri Jan 22, 03:25:00 PM EST



    Your answer is a question?

    Sorry, I don't get it.


    " Doug said...
    It is torture and it should be used?

    Fri Jan 22, 03:25:00 PM EST



    We'll have to try this again some other time Doug.

    Bye.


    .

    ReplyDelete
  56. "I do appreciate the...

    Oh gee, Doug. I thought you had left.

    Read your last post but don't really get it either.

    Sorry


    .

    ReplyDelete
  57. Suppose I am Jack Bauer. At my mercy is a gentleman, who I know with absolute certainty knows the detonation code to an atomic device set for operation in downtown Seattle in two hours. It is my understanding that 200,000 citizens will be instantly vaporized, with an additional 500,000 to perish later of radiation poisoning.

    Would I torture him to get that code?

    ReplyDelete
  58. Quirk,
    you said...

    "Blah, blah, blah.
    Is waterboarding torture?
    Should it be used?"

    "Finally, a rational post.

    Yes.

    No.
    "

    I replied:

    "Oh, no.
    OK, thanks.
    Bye.
    "

    ,@ Fri Jan 22, 03:25:00 PM EST

    For some odd reason you chose to respond to the first @
    Fri Jan 22, 03:25:00 PM EST rather than the second.

    To construct a point, no doubt.

    Not worth the effort to ask what that point might be, as you tire me with your endless evasions in your defense of your pusillanimous position re:

    Defending Innocent Civilians against terror by unlawful combatants.

    ReplyDelete
  59. We know

    "You're BETTER THAN THAT!"

    Allen!

    ReplyDelete
  60. doug,

    No, I am not.

    If I act against the terrorist, he will be harmed.

    If I do not act against the terrorist, 700,000 of my innocent, fellow citizens will die.

    Am I willing to go to jail for my decision? You betcha!



    To all, Shabbat Shalom!

    ReplyDelete
  61. But, but...
    Allen:

    The only way the terrorist could avoid your evil ways would be to give up that information!

    Are you such a lowly creature as to create that conundrum???


    Shabbat Shalom!
    backatcha

    ReplyDelete
  62. "Oh, no.
    OK, thanks.
    Bye."


    Sorry, Doug.

    Thought that post was addressed to Rufus' preceeding post.

    Pusillanimous? I impressed.


    .

    ReplyDelete
  63. How about that "Party of the Peepulz," eh?

    $500.00 to attend Tea Party Convention,

    and $100,000.00 Speakerz Fee to Sarah Palin.

    Peepuls Arize!

    ReplyDelete
  64. McCain's first Two Celebrity endorsements?

    Palin, and Scott Brown.

    ReplyDelete
  65. The argument over waterboarding is tedious especially when buttressed only by one's "conviction".

    ReplyDelete
  66. Is slapping torture? Belly slapping? Insects? Threats of death and deceit?

    Do "alleged" terrorists qualify for Miranda Rights and Civil protections?

    Are non-uniform, non-state enemy combatants covered by the Geneva Convention?

    ReplyDelete
  67. Are hundreds or thousands of US lives worth the high ground of not waterboarding? Was it wrong to waterboard Khaleed Sheik Muhammed?

    How many times was waterboarding employed since 9-11.

    ReplyDelete
  68. Does that high ground extend to wiretapping international calls of suspected terrorists? Or is that wrong also.

    ReplyDelete
  69. Is jihad international in nature?

    ReplyDelete
  70. Is it a criminal offense to use an UAV to rocket a house full of women and children in order to kill al-Qaeda?

    ReplyDelete
  71. Were the Dresden fire bombings and the A-Bombs illegal or immoral?

    ReplyDelete
  72. Has the world done a thing since 9-11 to revise the Geneva Convention to address jihad?

    ReplyDelete
  73. Q takes a holiday up to the peninsula to research recipes for cooking carp. While he's gone an AQ inspired followup occurs over Detroit and its environs. Family and friends die. Q's income from Ford is cutoff when Ford's financial offices are vaporized in the conflagration. Foreign intelligence sources link the successful attack to the organization that sponsored the youth who demonstrated mental problems at Christmas.

    Does Q insist that the right thing was done by Mirandizing the youth instead of using enhanced interrogation techniques?

    .

    ReplyDelete
  74. that's when the rubber meets the road.

    ReplyDelete
  75. whit, it is not, nor was it ever, the "other" that is "covered" by the Geneva Accords.

    We are "covered" by it. It is a unilateral statement of behaviors that we UNILATERALLY agree to undertake.

    That you disagree with the SCOTUS in its' reading of the Accords and the Treaty obligations we have undertaken, Constitutionally, not surprising.

    ReplyDelete
  76. No, we are not bound by the Geneva Convention when the other side is not a party to it.

    Go read it.

    ReplyDelete
  77. I have, and so did the SCOTUS, in Hamdan v Rumsfeld.

    Like it or not.

    ReplyDelete
  78. That the SCOTUS rejected, out of hand, the proposition that we are engaged in any sort of a whirled war, clear.

    We are engaged in a series of "local" conflicts.

    That's the US law, as of today.

    There was and is no move by either the Executive or Legislative branches of the Federals to overturn the SCOTUS interpretation of the nature of those various COIN conflicts.

    ReplyDelete
  79. Part I : General provisions

    In addition to the provisions which shall be implemented in peacetime, the present Convention shall apply to all cases of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them.
    The Convention shall also apply to all cases of partial or total occupation of the territory of a High Contracting Party, even if the said occupation meets with no armed resistance.
    Although one of the Powers in conflict may not be a party to the present Convention, the Powers who are parties thereto shall remain bound by it in their mutual relations. They shall furthermore be bound by the Convention in relation to the said Power, if the latter accepts and applies the provisions thereof.


    So, if the conflict is with a non signatory, a signatory is not bound by the Convention until the nonsignatory agrees to be bound by it.

    I do not recall Bin Laden having a delegate sign on to the Geneva Convention. I must have missed that. The Supremes chose to ignore historical precedent for the treatment of pirates of which al-Qaeda is a modern variant.

    ReplyDelete
  80. I didn't know this, just proves how inept the Bush Team lawyers really were.

    Charges dismissed

    On June 5, 2007, Hamdan and Canadian youth Omar Khadr, had all charges against them dismissed.[41][42][43] The judges presiding over their military commissions ruled that the Military Commissions Act did not give them the jurisdiction to try Hamdan and Khadr, because it only authorized the trial of "unlawful enemy combatants".

    Hamdan and Khadr's Combatant Status Review Tribunals, like those of all the other Guantanamo captives, had confirmed that they were only "enemy combatants".


    Not a single one of the Gitmo detainees was an "unlawful" enemy combatant, so judged by our own Tribunal.

    ReplyDelete
  81. Part I : General provisions
    ARTICLE 4

    Persons protected by the Convention are those who, at a given moment and in any manner whatsoever, find themselves, in case of a conflict or occupation, in the hands of a Party to the conflict or Occupying Power of which they are not nationals.
    Nationals of a State which is not bound by the Convention are not protected by it.


    A serious argument can be made that Afghanistan under the Taliban was not a party to the Geneva Accords. And remember Hamdan v. Rumsfeld was decided by a narrow majority comprised of the usual internationalist, revisionist liberals.

    Yes, it is the land of the land but it could just as easily be reversed by a narrow majority of conservative thinkers.

    ReplyDelete
  82. Article 2, whit.

    ...That the relationship between the "High Contracting Parties" and a non-signatory, the party will remain bound until the non-signatory no longer acts under the strictures of the convention. ".

    But then aQ is not a "Power" or a "Party", but a criminal gang. The countries that aQ operates from, Afpakistan, are both signatory.

    Then there is the ever infamous Aticle 3, which was cited in Hamdan

    Article 3 has been called a "Convention in miniature." It is the only article of the Geneva Conventions that applies in non-international conflicts.[1] It describes minimal protections which must be adhered to by all individuals within a signatory's territory during an armed conflict not of an international character (regardless of citizenship or lack thereof): Noncombatants, combatants who have laid down their arms, and combatants who are hors de combat (out of the fight) due to wounds, detention, or any other cause shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, including prohibition of outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment. The passing of sentences must also be pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples. Article 3's protections exist even if one is not classified as a prisoner of war. Article 3 also states that parties to the internal conflict should endeavour to bring into force, by means of special agreements, all or part of the other provisions of GCIII.

    All of our COIN and anti-terror operations are covered under Article 3, so says the SCOTUS, and they know, fer sur.

    ReplyDelete
  83. combatants who are hors de combat (out of the fight) due to wounds, detention, or any other cause shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, including prohibition of outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment. The passing of sentences must also be pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples. Article 3's protections exist even if one is not classified as a prisoner of war.

    ReplyDelete
  84. Yes, that is what SCOTUS ruled but do you agree that this is a conflict not of "international character"?

    See my comment on Article 2. If you have multiple parties in conflict, those that are signatories are bound to treat each other per Geneva. They are not bound to so treat nonsignatories.

    ReplyDelete
  85. I think that with the US presence, the conflicts are no longer "local" but international in nature.

    Afghanistan is a local conflict, not one of an international nature, on the part of the Taliban.
    Though there are cross border operations, from Pakistan, the insurgency in Afghanistan is local.

    In Pakistan, where we are hardly engaged, it is a purely local conflict.

    The Iraq War, was totally local and not connected to whirled jihad, except by US presence.

    I'd say that each conflict is local, with an enemy that is animated, to varying degrees, by a global religious doctrine.

    ReplyDelete
  86. Jihad is global. The Taliban gave aid and comfort to pirates who conducted war throughout the world.

    ReplyDelete
  87. What would Curtis LeMay do?

    John Singlaub?

    Barney Frank?

    .

    ReplyDelete
  88. But those border bandits or pirates, call 'em what you will, they are long gone from Afghanistan, whit.

    The folks we are tar-babied to, now, they have nothing to do with the raids on NYCity and DC.

    The latest bomber attempt, not emanating from Afpakistan, but Yeman. The next could be from Somalia or London.

    A global doctrine, but local conflicts. The only international fighting force involved, that's US and ours.

    Their combat arms sre indigenous to their ground.

    ReplyDelete
  89. Wow!

    I salute General Singlaub for his service.

    ReplyDelete
  90. Even if Osama and Doc Z had been killed at Tora Bora, the problems of Afpakistan would still exist.

    The riots in Nigeria would still have happened and Iran would still be spinning centrifuges.

    The radical Islamists in Yemen would still have been there.
    The Shoe and Shorts bombers would not have been deterred, they had never met either Doc Z or Osama and never would.

    In a battle of ideas, guns are not the best tools.

    Look where it got the Brits.

    ReplyDelete
  91. When they bomb your embassies, when they attack your landmark skycraper twice, destroying it the second time and killing over three thousand of your citizens, when they attack your warship, killing and wounding sailors, what are you supposed to do?

    Talk about it?

    ReplyDelete
  92. That's a good one, LT. I think we all know the answer to that.

    ReplyDelete
  93. My, my, my. Another Friday night at the EB.

    Wasn't MLD supposed to choose the topic?


    .

    ReplyDelete
  94. First and foremost, whit, you define who "they" are.

    Which we did.

    Doc Z and Osama, along with a specific set of henchmen.

    Not a foreign power but a loose group of Arab radicals that originated in Egypt and was funded by individual Saudis.

    Myself, I know in my heart that the Pakistani and Saudis governments were behind Osama, still providing a safe haven shelter to he and his.

    But the Federals deny my perspective has any validity.

    You see religion as the driving factor, while I see the wars, even the religious aspects of them, as a continuation of the cultural battles fought by Alexander. All the way to Afpakistan.

    Cultural and geographic conflicts predating all the Abrahamics.

    ReplyDelete
  95. There are better things to talk about on a Friday night than torture, unless it's this kind.

    ReplyDelete
  96. Long Island Lolita strips for Haiti.


    Amy Fisher Strips for Haiti

    Inspirational.


    .

    ReplyDelete
  97. Dems Propose Debt Ceiling Increase

    "Senate Democrats proposed Wednesday to increase the nation's debt limit by a record $1.9 trillion, but were scrambling to line up the votes for the increase, which would authorize the Treasury to borrow enough money to cover the government's bills through the rest of the year.

    The proposed increase would raise the legal cap on borrowing to $14.3 trillion, which would increase the nation's accumulated debt to about the size of the overall U.S. economy."


    .

    ReplyDelete
  98. That's so noble of her. Maybe she can donate a boob...or two.

    ReplyDelete
  99. Here's what inspires good noir

    Take two lap dancers with a popular Thursday-night lesbian floor show.

    Add one wealthy Mexican fabric trader.

    Put them all together on a stained bed in the "Champagne Room" of Big Daddy Lou's Hot Lap Dance Club on West 38th Street and stir it all up with the news that the wealthy fabric trader is really an undercover vice cop.

    ReplyDelete