I see today that Swiss authorities have criticized Israel for its actions in Gaza, claiming that it wasn't taking adequate steps to protect civilians and that it was utilizing collective punishment against the Palestinians.
It's obvious from recent developments like this and the absurd Supreme Court decision endowing Geneva Convention protections on terrorists that methods of warfare have changed to such an extent that the Geneva Convention must be modified, if not dismissed entirely.
The simple truth is, it's only the civilized Western societies that are allowing themselves to be limited by this. Switzerland wouldn't think of condemning the Palestinian terrorists for violating the conventions by allowing their "troops" to operate out of uniform, or for placing their "troops" and military installations in civilian areas, where they use civilians and particularly children as human shields. Why does Switzerland not condemn this? Simply put, it's because the civilized world doesn't expect the Palestinians or other Muslim extremist societies to operate by rules of civilized warfare. We have lowered our expectations of behavior for one side of the war, and then condemn the opposing forces for adjusting their methods of warfare in the face of an unprincipled enemy.
Of course, the world will wail and lament if the Geneva Conventions are cast aside--but truthfully, they exist only as another weapon in the Muslim extremist arsenal, a weapon that they are utilizing against Israelis and Americans and Britons on a daily basis.
It's time to clarify that the Geneva Conventions do not apply to a force that does not place its troops in uniform; they do not apply to a force that views its populace as nothing more than human sandbags; and it does not apply to a force that uses human beings as hostages without regard for the same Geneva Conventions.
So long as one side is forced to wage a 21st century war using 20th century philosophies, there's little chance of a clear victory...