Reid: waffen SS "not so bad"

Apparently:

The defence secretary, John Reid, today called for a review of the Geneva convention on the treatment of prisoners of war, saying that the 20th-century rules of war were no longer sufficient…

… "We now have to cope with a deliberate regression towards barbaric terrorism by our opponents," he said.

"The legal constraints upon us have to be set against an enemy that adheres to no constraints whatsoever, but an enemy so swift to insist that we do in every particular, and that makes life very difficult for the forces of democracy."

Sounds like Jihad envy. I’d be interesting to hear why John thinks the Waffen SS weren’t so bad, comparatively speaking. Or what moral constraints they thought they were operating under. Or why the Geneva Convention wasn't obsolete then, back in the golden age.

In particular, Mr Reid said the spread of weapons of mass destruction posed new questions about when it was right to mount a pre-emptive strike against another country to prevent an attack.

Hang on. If the threat comes from transnational terrorists with weapons of mass destruction, why does this justify a pre-emptive invasion of another state?

Mr Reid made clear he was hoping to stimulate a wider debate and did not put forward specific changes.

Oh yes, a debate. Extremists in one corner advocate the right of power to do what it pleases. “Extremists” in the other support the Geneva convention. Sensible moderates try to find a "middle way". Step forward Martin Kettle and the usual gang of idiots.

"What I would like us to explore is to what extent we could impose upon non-state actors the same obligations to civilised conduct, even in warfare, which we apply to ourselves," he said.

Well maybe you can’t. In which case you either behave more like them or less like them. Of course, the Geneva conventions have been ignored in the past when convenient. But they do cast the shadow of the tribunal over a politician’s career. As an old mate of Slobbo’s, Reid may be uncomfortably aware of that.

Comments

[Charlie Whitaker]

All very well said.

Interesting that this lot feel the need to take the offensive. How many speeches, in how many days? Do they really think they have a prayer?

[c james]

This perception of the masses that the Waffen SS were nothing but criminal thugs has just about gone far enough. The Waffen SS were front line troops , ..Germany's finest.
Sure there are accounts during war which would condemn any side for the handful of criminal types who are guilty of excesses, a thorough campaign of false information has done a really good job on the this particular group
Many were to come home after a long war only to be hunted down by illegal groups of Wiesenthal's thugs and murdered after the war ended.
Tens of thousands of Waffen SS soldiers were lined up and murdered. It is an absolute falshood that these soldiers were anything but good soldiers. However the victors write the ensuing history. The Waffen SS have been villified for the purpose of demonising them in a blind tunnel visioned convenient fashion.

[jamie]

Well, yes there will be a vacancy for Home Secretary soon, but this is not the place to apply.

[dsquared]

I must say that on a casual reading of his book, I would have placed Clive James on quite the other side of the Waffen SS issue from the one he appears to be taking above.

[Backword Dave]

I still haven't finished 'Beyond a Boundary' but I thought that author used all his initials, and is also dead. Still, I'm even more surprised by his revisionist views than by his visit from beyond the grave.