[xone]

So this talk of action on the one-year anniversary of Brandon’s Fauxnauguration has something legit behind it?

IDK, but I doubt it as Q warned regarding date setting. As for the status of the individuals mentioned, that began when they started to play war against the US. All that happens at the one year anniversary of occupation is that the Geneva Conventions aren't the controlling authority anymore.

[Bigg Red]

Okah, thanQ.

And we don’t necessarily know exactly when that occupation began, right?

[little jeremiah]

All that happens at the one year anniversary of occupation is that the Geneva Conventions aren't the controlling authority anymore.

Since we are almost at the one year mark of the foreign occupation (as per Majic Eyes Only's delving into the Law of War Manual), what would be the controlling authority after the expiry of one year?

[LittleLinda]

Section 11.3.2 of the Law of War Manual begins

“In the case of occupied territory, the application of the [Geneva Convention] shall cease one year after the general close of military operations; ... “ If “the general close of military operations” was January 20, 2021, then the one year anniversary of Biden’s inauguration on Thursday may be meaningful.

However, I interpret “the general close of military operations” to mean the end of the war, and the term “military operations” applies to BOTH sides of a conflict. Unless we’re already doomed, I don’t think there’s been a general close of military operations yet, as the occupied territory (the US) hasn’t closed its military operations yet. Or at least we hope not.

Am I talking about the wrong section of the LoW Manual?

[Melian]