I think the point that was trying to be made was that if NK operated spy planes in international airspace, just narrowly outside US territorial waters, it would be viewed as an agressive act and it is highly likely the spyplane would be “dealt with”.

So morally, you regard the Al’Qaeda detainees differently to captured Republican Guard soldiers, or differently to SS soldiers in the concerntration camps??

As for not being at war, whilst it was never declared formally, the US administration has repeatedly maintained that they were “at war against terrorism” therefore anyone captured is a prisoner of the war, surely?

Was that why BA converted their A318 orders into A320/A321 ?

Also with their A319/A320/A321 fleet being IAE V2500 powered I shouldn’t think they were overly keen to take on the PW engine, although their 737 fleet does have the CFM 56, so maybe it was only the PW they disliked.

….but at least they should have avoided using a word like “synchronized” which is spelt differently outisde the US/Canada!

Yes, I think we all agree that POW’s in Iraqi custody can expect to be mistreated/tortured.

But, as the media here in the UK has made plain on the front pages, the US broke every rule in the book with the Al’Qaeda POW’s in Cuba.

Is it therefore right for the US to condemn Iraqi torture (a very, very serious breach of the GC) whilst their treatment of the Al’Qaeda chaps is also a breach, albeit only “serious” and not “very, very serious” ?

I’d agree with all the above. It would sadden me to learn that soldiers from the UK or US were being mistreated, however I do not believe the Geneva Convention has legal force here. The case for Iraq obeying it is more one of moral swaysion than legal compulsion.

Also, did anyone see the TV footage of surrendered Iraqi soldiers being searched at gunpoint by the British? I’m pretty sure this is not allowed by the GC (ie. making a public spectacle of POW’s).