Geneva Convention and Forever Wars
The piece argues that the Geneva Conventions, while essential for civilian protection, now constrain conventional militaries and make decisive, overwhelming force difficult. This legal restraint fuels prolonged “forever wars,” allowing irregular insurgents to exploit civilian‑shield tactics. Citing Afghanistan and Iraq, the author notes that U.S. policy under President Trump is shifting toward greater operational latitude to achieve faster outcomes. The broader implication is an erosion of the distinction principle that underpins international humanitarian law.
Is Omitting Data From a COVID-19 Study Conclusion a Lie?
The OpenSAFELY cohort study examined Pfizer vaccination in English children aged 5‑15, finding virtually no COVID‑related deaths and fewer than seven critical‑care admissions during an early‑pandemic window. Vaccine impact was limited to modest, short‑term reductions in infection and a slight...