all the parties to the geneva protocol to send in that letter to the french government now apparently even the british are willing to go along with this. and the us then is the only outlier on d. you just maybe they'll say ok let's let's stop using the. frances boils cause seems a desperate one the united states continued to make use of uranium in developing their military arsenal. in two thousand and three one year before the battle of fallujah donald rumsfeld then defense secretary made a reference before the u.s. congress to the use of a new weapon the hellfire missile. the new missile can take out the first floor of a building without damaging the floors above and is capable of reaching around corners striking enemy forces that hiding or bunkers this declaration went largely unnoticed but it heralded the development of a new missile that would be tested during the early days of the war in iraq. some experts did react to rumsfeld declaration one of them was arms researcher di williams. this scientist is a member of the un institute for disarmament research. he claims the hellfire m

have forgotten in fact i think they are trying to retract the statement they are part of the geneva protocol of 1925. they ratified it in 1968, and that prohibit it is use of chemical weapons in warfare so we expect them to abide by their international obligations. >> rose: and they said we will not use them on syrian people but, if, in fact, there are invasive forces that come from outside, we may use them. >> we reminded them again that they have an international obligations under the geneva protocol. >> rose: what does that tell you about them that they would make a statement like that? >> at this point it only says to me they made a bad statement which they are trying to retract now. >> rose: isn't this civil war already? >> well, it looks very much like it, yes. >> rose: and are you supplying arms to the syrian regime? >> we have been fulfilling the contracts which we concluded with them years ago and we have nothing to do with fighting civil war,. >> do you view it as a commercial transaction? >> no, but what is involved is, for example, anti-aircraft systems, which cannot be used, phy

only it's only protocol additional protocol number two two geneva conventions which qualifies as an internal armed conflict actions by side that take place on the territory of any usually high body between its armed forces and antigovernment armed forces or other organized armed groups or use for the that i'm wondering this is just reported through much governing group as well as forces you believe me exists our eyes continuous agreed armed actions most watched and sheer it is clear that their interests committer fred course believe use if you will so you that the risk confrontation going on of two large military forces will mean each other most and surgical of education implies a blog asians to implement their requirements of the national imagery of law in relation to combatants the only people who and their position is suitable in you come the tent here and also in relation to those who do not take part in the fighting and there is a ban on you to take hostages to get life torture is possible if abuse of human dignity and so on. to the bones of a group of people who work. there dish on pro