What are the rules of the Geneva Convention? Should they apply to terrorists?

Question

They are not soldiers, or even identifiable. They hide behind women and children.

Answer 1

The Geneva convention applies only to UNIFORMED soldiers of an actual army. Applying those same rights to people who snipe women and children on pilgrimage is a mockery of Geneva itself.

Answer 2

The Geneva Convention was established after World War 2 when the United Nations was just in it's infancy. Before real terrorism existed. The Geneva Convention clearly was established for governments to follow as a guidline for the treatment of UNIFORMED MILITARY, and prisoners of war during times of war.

A uniformed military is a recognized militia of a government. It clearly states a government military cannot use civilian clothes, attack innocent civilian population, or hide in hospitals, schools, or religious buildings, or use the civilian population for protection.

Terrorist are not uniformed, or a recognized militia of a government. Therefore the Geneva convention does not apply. Terrorist target mostly innocent civilian population in an effort to force the populous of a government to change it's current belief, or treatment of a specific group.

If what wilf says is true, then the geneva convention applies to drug dealers, and producers also since most countries are also fighting a war on drugs.

Teacher, camp x-ray hasn't been used for years. Camp X-Ray was a temporary holding area for the detainees held in Cuba. The facilities that are used now are closer to Federal prison. There is a new facility being built that is an exact duplicate of a federal prison. The treatment that the detainees have is much better than in most prisons in other countries. They get 3 meals a day that respect their religious needs. Free medical treatment, free dental treatment. They are allowed to send and recieve mail. The international red corss is there often to help the illeterate detainees write letters home, or to read letters to them. So all these news articles about how badly they are treated are really overblown garbage.

Answer 3

The rules of the Geneva convention are many and manifold. They describe the correct treatment for Prisoners of War. As the US has declared a "War on terror" it is therefore bound by the Geneva convention regardless of how they feel about the indivdual protagonists. As a Christian nation it should, of course, ignore the activities of the "aggressor" but one can argue that it is, in fact, the US that is the aggressor and has provoked the responses by their Imperialist attitude. Lies about Iraq in order to grab their oil, don't help. And I quote "A terrorist is any person, or organisation, that commits murder for a political purpose". Those are the words of Dubya on CNN. That makes the USG the largest terrorist organisation on earth, especially when you consider their drug trafficking, illegal incursions, judicial murder, torture, institutional racism and much of the interference that is why the likes of Franklin, Wilson, Washington, Adams et al., are know as the spinners in heaven for what they are currently doing in the grave.
As for hiding behind women and children; why is it that an American Bomber destroys a hospital it's "Collateral Damage" and when a perceived, the real, enemy of the US does the same it's terroism. Believe the propaganda if you want, but it is idiocy and denial to do so.

Answer 4

The Geneva Conventions (there are four of them) set specific limits on the actions that can be taken by signatory countries. The limits are on what the countries can do, regardless of who they are doing it to.

It's shocking how many people are asserting what the Conventions do or do not cover, but have apparently never read them. The full text below of the Third and Fourth Conventions are linked below.

These rules only recognize three categories of people. First, there are people currently armed and engaging in hostilities. Second, there are people who are no longer armed, because they were captured or surrendered or wounded. Third, there are people who were never armed. Tell me how this break down doesn't include people suspected (but not yet convicted) of committing terrorist actions. They're either carrying weapons now, or no longer carrying weapons. Read Article III, IV and V of C3, and Articles III and IV of C4.

Specifically, the rules apply to "Persons .. 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." Read the text. Anyone who is held captive in any manner whatsoever is protected if they are held by a country that is party to the treaty. It doesn't matter who they are.

The US Supreme Court has confirmed that the Geneva Conventions apply to anyone captured or held by US forces. See Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2006). And the rules of the Geneva Convention apply to any actions taken by the US against non-US citizens, regardless of who the actions are taken against.

If you want to ignore the law, go ahead. But that's what the law says.

Answer 5

But that is the problem. Even if you follow the Geneva Convention protocol for "Enemy Combatants" they are not entitled to be treated as P.O.W.'s. By not wearing clearly marked uniforms and hiding among civilians thus placing those civilians in danger Enemy Combatants are not protected like regular military personnel. That is why what the Supreme Court did was so heinous. Even if you treated these prisoners as P.O.W.'s, they would not be entitled to court hearings. The Supreme Court overstepped its bounds in a very serious way. The President should have refused to cooperate and let a Constitutional Crisis occur. The proof would have been that the Constitution obviously does not grant the Supreme Court to interfere in areas the Constitution specifically empowers the Executive Branch to conduct. Imagine if the President got up one morning and decided to overrule a Supreme Court decision. Or if the Legislature decided to overrule a Supreme Court decision. That is what is occurring here. These prisoners have no Constitutional Status. What happens to them is up to the Commander-in-Chief since they are not protected by international conventions. This will have serious ramifications. It is going to seriously impact the next Commander-in-Chief in a very negative way. *

Answer 6

No the rules of the Geneva convention DO NOT apply to terrorists.

They are not uniformed members of a soveriegn states armed forces, so they are not under the conventions envelope.


Now whether the principals of the convention should apply to them is another question, but there is no legal obligation (under Geneva) to provide them to terrorists.

Answer 7

The rules of the Geneva Conventions apply to High Contracting Parties, which is poorly defined. It refers however to organized recognized governments. Al Queda is not a High Contracting Party, so it does not apply to conflicts involving them. Insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan are no longer part of High Contracting Parties since both countries have new recognized governments (at varying levels of effectiveness). The only questionable area is those from the Taliban. THis government was only recognized by the UAE, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia so it remains a huge question.

Personally, I think they all be burned alive when found guilty.

Answer 8

Plenty of terrorists are in uniform. Look at what happened in WW2 when Dresden and Hamburg were bombed not because they were a military target but just to test a scientific theory about fire storms. These were criminal acts. The Germans called the pilots 'Zerrorflieger'. The dropping of the atom bombs on Japan were criminal acts of the 1st degree. Japan was already beaten and had admitted it in their Parliament. What is a terrorist? The second world war would have claimed many more lives but for the Intelligence provided by people in the occupied countries and even in Germany. They were the 'Underground'. You would not expect them to walk around in uniform would you. The Dutch underground was an integral part of the Dutch Army. Before they could shoot at a German soldier they had to warn him. And after capturing him they had to look after his welfare. It is a little known fact that German prisoners of war were kept in Holland and handed over to the Allies from who they (the Underground) got an official receipt. When you use the word terrorist you should not accuse them of being cowards. Many 'terrorists' made it possible for you to rubbish them here. When the English (and other nationalities) dropped parachutists near Arnhem the Dutch underground fought with them. At one stage a group of parachutists was cut off from their main army. The Germans sent an armoured track vehicle. This would have wiped out the cutoff group. The Underground intercepted a radio message and alerted the civilian population. These people were 'terrorists' to the Germans. What they did was to build a wall to stop the German vehicle. It was not your usual building material. A wall, 6 feet high, consisting of corpses, men, women, children, foe or enemy, even family. Is this hiding behind women and children? The parachutists escaped. But the whole of Holland paid a heavy penalty. The food ration was cut back and thousands of people starved to death.You ever seen the 5 year old son of a terrorist put a hatchet in a dog's head because the terrorist father could not bring himself to do it? A Bridge Too Far.
There are 2 books available and a movie.

Answer 9

The Geneva Convention only applies to uniformed soldiers of a government or country. Terrorists are recognized by neither, in fact they are against governments and nations so the Geneva Conventions should not be modified in any way to accommodate them.

Answer 10

The rules of the Geneva Convention apply to UNIFORMED combatants in a DECLARED war.
By this rule, not even spies are protected, because they are not in uniform. So why should terrorists be?