...so why is it that so many insist that we honor this in their favor?
2006-09-15 15:15:36 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Please answer only if you understand what is contained in the Geneva Conventions concerning the rules of warfare.
2006-09-15 15:19:40 · update #1
Third answerer, please read the details above.
2006-09-15 15:21:40 · update #2
I am asking about the GENEVA CONVENTIONS! NOT ABOUT KILLING INNOCENTS PEOPLE!!! PLEASE SKIP THIS QUESTION UNLESS YOU HAVE SOMETHING INFORMED AND INTELLIGENT TO ANSWER IT WITH!
2006-09-15 15:25:40 · update #3
For normobria... I asked a question. I did not make a statement. Thank you for an informed answer.
2006-09-15 15:50:08 · update #4
For coragryph, the second paragraph in article 4:
Nationals of a State which is not bound by the Convention are not protected by it. Nationals of a neutral State who find themselves in the territory of a belligerent State, and nationals of a co-belligerent State, shall not be regarded as protected persons while the State of which they are nationals has normal diplomatic representation in the State in whose hands they are.
2006-09-16 04:03:14 · update #5
It's not about reciprocity. The conventions bind the parties (countries) who are members. It limits any actions by those countries, regardless of who they are acting against.
Article 1: "Although one of the Powers in conflict may not be a party to the present Convention, the Powers who are parties thereto shall remain bound..."
Article 4: "Persons protected by the Convention are those who, at a given moment and in any manner whatsoever, find themselves, in case of a conflict or occupation, in the hands of a Party to the conflict or Occupying Power of which they are not nationals."
The conventions bind any parties (countries) who are members. The US is a party to the Convention. So, the protections apply. Reciprocity have nothing to do with it. Just like the Constitution limits US govt actions, regardless of who is being accused.
2006-09-15 15:58:47 · answer #1 · answered by coragryph 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
You have two choices: try them as criminals, or try them under the Geneva rules for POW's. (unless you just render them to Syria and they disappear).
The Geneva Convention recognizes inhabitants of a conflict area who take up arms in the face of an occupying force as 'protected persons'. That includes the Taliban and Iraqi insurgents.
By the tone of your statement, you would deny protection to the French Resistance in WWII. Their actions were no different from Iraqis and Afghans. It is for precisely that reason that we must treat these detainees under the rules of Geneva. Foreign fighters, however, are a different matter. They can be executed as spies.
If we don't treat the detainees as POW's, then our next conflict might include insurgents fighting for our side (like the Afghans fighting the Russians), and they will lose protection based on our actions today.
2006-09-15 15:22:53 · answer #2 · answered by normobrian 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
They clearly have not earned it and do not qualify for Geneva protections. They violate all the rules of war, are not soldiers of a nation and wear no uniform.
2006-09-15 15:26:28 · answer #3 · answered by Il Siciliano di Miami 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Total Morons! These terrorists are takin up space and media attention. They shoulda been hanged 2 yrs ago!! We got too many lawyers mucking up our system!!!
2006-09-15 15:29:35 · answer #4 · answered by racingdiego@sbcglobal.net 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Well then they should be tried as criminals. What's so hard about that. Dang we treated our serial killers better than these dudes, who may or may not have done anything to us.
We live and die by the RULE OF LAW...suspend it for your own convenience and you might as well burn the Constitution.
2006-09-15 15:18:13 · answer #5 · answered by KERMIT M 6 · 7⤊ 1⤋
I'm trying to figure this out myself. I'm just as confused as to why there are US Senators trying to grant constitutional rights to them. A real pity. They want to kill us, but we want to make them comfortable, in hopes that they will like us. Not going to happen.
2006-09-15 15:26:41 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Since they have'nt been proved guilty, they should have rights.
Even after being proven, many serial killers live in better comfort.
2006-09-15 15:30:38 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I firmly believe that in order to deserve human rights, one must first act like a human - and this does not include the indiscriminate killing of innocent men, women and children to further your ideology.
2006-09-15 15:22:27 · answer #8 · answered by LeAnne 7 · 1⤊ 4⤋
All people deserve human rights, even conservatives.
2006-09-15 15:19:43 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
They are morons.
2006-09-15 15:17:31 · answer #10 · answered by Colorado 5 · 2⤊ 5⤋