English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

answer for these crimes? So far they have only prosecuted the lowly soldiers doing what they are told! Talk about the trickle down effect!!

2006-07-06 04:25:48 · 13 answers · asked by olderandwiser 4 in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

The Geneva Convention sets rules for the treatment of prisoners of war. We have violated that. And to the Bush people. I do not hate Pres Bush. He as the Commander in Chief , sets the tone for the Generals. He does not have to say go get them. His tone has always been, go get em, kind of like a cowboy in the old west. And the Generals and the CIA pass that down the line. Please don't be so blind what he's done right , he's done right and what he's done wrong he'sdone wrong. He is not GOD.

2006-07-06 05:40:54 · update #1

13 answers

If the Commander-in-Sheik didn't get impeached for publicly admitting to intentional violation of federal law (FISA), I can't see the American people getting too upset about treaty violations.

We've long gone past the point where this country has any claim to be a nation of laws. All three branches blatantly ignore the existing legal structure, and make decisions based purely on political agendas. The rest of the posturing is just for show.

2006-07-06 05:12:17 · answer #1 · answered by coragryph 7 · 1 2

Terrorists are not covered under the Geneva convention.

The Geneva Convention of 1949 was meant to regulate international warfare between states, with some basic provision for civil wars as well.

What the U.S. is engaging in today is something different, a war against an organization of terrorists who do not constitute a government, rendering the Geneva Convention essentially irrelevant.

The Geneva Convention is built around the idea of detaining prisoners of war who are not suicidal terrorists, who are instead civilized men who — perhaps under duress — performed a service to their nation and are willing actually to surrender once they surrender.

The Geneva Convention simply doesn't contemplate "soldiers" who will bite their guards and strap grenades to their bodies, if given the chance. We are in a different world than that described and regulated by the Geneva Convention.

2006-07-06 11:35:54 · answer #2 · answered by Doug B 3 · 0 0

Um, probably because the President did NOT command the violation of the Geneva Convention. And he didn't do it himself. Sure, he's trying to find a way around some laws, but who could blame him? I would be too, especially after the atrocities many of those bastards at Guantanamo Bay committed before they were caught.
Please keep in mind that when you're fighting a war against people who would behead you with a rusty, blunt hacksaw if they catch you, the rules change a little bit.

2006-07-06 11:29:38 · answer #3 · answered by The_Cricket: Thinking Pink! 7 · 0 0

Exactly what verified acts have we committed that have violated an 'in force' rule that you can quote? And how about an example of an order (a quote referencing the name of the person who gave that order) that violated a part of the GC (that you can also quote)?

There is a lot of noise about these 'violations' but nobody seems to be able to actually point out any specific ones. (Except for individual acts that the military has investigated as criminal offenses.)

The sad fact is that people need to be skeptical of claims that the US committed 'war crimes.' So far these claims have turned out to be hot air.

Clue for the clueless: A 'war crime' is an act that is actually forbidden by some in-force international law - your political opinions have nothing to do with whether something is - or is not a 'war crime.'

2006-07-06 11:34:07 · answer #4 · answered by MikeGolf 7 · 0 0

The geneva convention? We are the only country that has ever even tried to follow it. I have not seen any of the other countrys try to do good by it. I say screw it and treat others likethey treat us. On that logic we are being way too nice. Maybe we should pull out fingernails like the veit kong, or cut off prisiners balls like the Japs. Or maybe we could just blow away whole viliages like the Chinise. Geneva Convention.....Please. This is war and things will happen that you dont like. Get over it that is what keeps us free to say stupid things like you just did. !!!!!!!!!!

2006-07-06 11:35:42 · answer #5 · answered by bildymooner 6 · 0 0

You cant be serious. So because a pud pulling private violated the Geneva convention...you think the President should be prosecuted? You need to lay off the weed dude!

2006-07-06 11:28:27 · answer #6 · answered by akebhart 4 · 0 0

Where is your proof that the Commander In Chief told someone to do something illegal?
Or are you just another of those that accuse without needing any actual evidence?

2006-07-06 11:28:52 · answer #7 · answered by ~Gate~ 5 · 0 0

He will be when he gets out of office. The Supreme Court just slammed him again for doing it!!

"See, free nations do not develop weapons of mass destruction."
—So W., does this mean the U.S. is not a free nation?...
Source: The Chicago Sun-Times, Oct. 13, 2003

2006-07-06 11:28:59 · answer #8 · answered by cantcu 7 · 0 0

You seem to be a hater of the President.
I have found that those who hate the President are usually duped by all sorts of false information provided by the liberal media.
Maybe YOU need to be called to account rather than the President!

2006-07-06 11:31:43 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Please quote the Geneva Convention statutes and advise me of how those apply to any violations committed by our government. Please also apply those same conventions and UN edicts of conduct to the nations we are occupying. Thank you...please return to watching Liberal TV on cable and come back with some facts, instead of milk crate on the corner rantings.

2006-07-06 11:30:34 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers