Since we are at war with al-Qaeda...?

Question

OK, we have not declared war, but we are still fighting them as our enemy.

Anyway, if we were to capture an al-Qaeda associate in America, they would presumably not be wearing any kind of uniform. Technically, that would make him a spy. Spies are not subject to the same rules of war as other combatants. So, couldn't we just use alternative methods of interrogation and then execute them, as that is the customary punishment for spies?

That would eliminate this whole need for a trial now, wouldn't it?

Not wearing a uniform and being a combatant inside enemy territory makes you technically a spy. Under the Geneva convention, which we must give its protections to terrorists, all members of a fighting force must wear some kind of distinctive uniform, even if it is nothing more than a red arm bands.

Under the rules of war, spies can be shot. Also, I am not advocating the use of torture. If you consider bright lights and cold temperatures torture, then that is another issue.

Finally, I am not advocating this position, just pointing out that the US is showing an enormous amount of restraint.

The Rosenberg's were American citizens. In times of war, spies do not have to be given a trial. In WWII, a soldier caught behind enemy lines who wore civilian clothes could be captured and shot as a spy.

Also, a terrorist in the US and is planning an attack would be gathering intelligence on information such as security details.

The Geneva convention does not provide any specific protection for terrorists. Also, the conventions state "that the relationship between the "High Contracting Parties" and a non-signatory, the party will remain bound until the non-signatory no longer acts under the strictures of the convention."

Seeing as al-Qaeda does not follow the Conventions, they do not have to be granted its protections.

I really hope that the genocide suggestion is a joke....

Answer 1

Um, spies are tried and convicted. See the Rosenburgs during the Cold War. And spies are aligned with a foreign country, not with a terrorist cell.

Answer 2

At what point do you draw the line?

Would you simply allow your government to engage in murder and torture? Do you not realize the image this gives America?

A prisoner of war is just that....a prisoner of war. They are entitled to some rights. First, not being tortured.

You can't simply call someone a spy just because they don't have a "uniform." If I remember right, Al-Qaeda doesn't have a home country...therefore would not have a military uniform.

I could call you a spy because you don't wear Nike shoes like everyone else. Would that be fair to you?

Answer 3

Bush has declared his invasion of Iraq the first front of, the war on terror,, Afghanistan being another,, he also said that Lebanon was included,, indicating the Hezbollah terrorists who attacked Israel, a US proxy, or an ally of America,,,, also, Bush said that Osama bin Laden himself,, declared Iraq as the center of WW111, meaning that Osama has helped him set policy,, so if the Bush US policies proclaim the enemy as combatants,, the terrorists would fall within the Geneva Conventions,, now wouldn't they,,,technically that is,, , hey I would agree to execute known terrorists,, but George W Bush has established the rules of his war,,, now the details of torture will be leagally decided by the US Supreme Court,,,, not favorable to Bush.......

Answer 4

we've 2 separate subject concerns. Al Queda is a non-state mafia. If captured on US soil or for the period of covert operations they're civilian criminals. If captured for the period of a protection rigidity operation they may be the two...that ought to be a judgment call staring on the guy captured. different, non Al Qaeda forces battling on their very own turf are POW's till grew to become over to what ever passes for a valid government in Afghanistan or Iraq. some human beings pick to simplify this, however the regulation is the regulation....who has the authority to circulate exterior the regulation? no person! battling an invading rigidity on your guy or woman turf or maybe volunteering to combat an invading rigidity in yet another u . s . a . isn't against the regulation...Many US electorate, alongside with my dad, volunteered to combat against Franco's Fascists on the Republican area in Spain previous to WW2. The republican forces have been the recognized valid government of Spain at that element. No member of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade became ever charged with against the regulation via fact of participation. a private company Infiltrating yet another u . s . a . for the objective of attacking civilian targets IS against the regulation and could be taken care of as such. That rather plenty tracks international regulation. The Obama administration is as appropriate approximately this as this murky concern may be.

Answer 5

No, if we're at war, they would be a prisoner of war, subject to the Geneva Convention, which most of the world follows.

Answer 6

If the spy became a citizen then we would have to charge them with treason but I think you can just shout terrorist and their rights would be gone.

Answer 7

Well, you see, when confronted with a cancer, you take it out from it's source.

You eradicate it from it's roots, from it's origin.

Genocide? Maybe.

That may be the only effective way.

Then again, no official declaration of war by Congress, it's still in the "joke" phase.

Answer 8

why a spy, why not interrogate them as illegal aliens... I mean they're really not here to spy. In that case, we could just let them go free.

Answer 9

Leonard L said .... Well, you see, when confronted with a cancer, you take it out from it's source.

You eradicate it from it's roots, from it's origin.




So that would be US foreign policy, right?

Answer 10

Sounds good to me!