2006-12-22 03:54:04 · 15 answers · asked by Tommy Oliver 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Yes and more if needed!
2006-12-22 03:56:03 · answer #1 · answered by capnemo 5 · 5⤊ 0⤋
Tehnically speaking Guantanamo, and Abu Gharib are prisoner of war camps, which the Geneva Convention does allow. Now with that said, in regards to these camps I am sure that we have broken rules in regards to prisoner of war in regards to the Geneva Convention and the treatment of prisoners.
Guantanamo being part of Cuba
was chosen to avoid due process. After the Viet Nam war and the wars in South and Central America many in the international community asked that the international community forbid torture. The United Nations and THE International Court at the Haig was charged with enforcing this.
After September 11 the United States removed itself from participation in the International Court. Its pretty obvious why after the revelation that the United States was sending prisoners to countries such as Syria and Egypt to be tortured for information.
The Bush administrations used information gathered by the Syrians under torture as an excuse to invade Iraq. Later that prisoner admitted that he said what his tortures wanted him to say to avoid more pain.
DonPato
http://www.gayiraq.info/
2006-12-22 12:14:43 · answer #2 · answered by donpatocom 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Concentration camps are not allowed by the Geneva Covention. Prisoners of war may be detained in a humanitarian fashion and repatriated to their home nation after hostilities are over. Such prisoners may not be tortured or demeaned.
The Geneva Convention specifically regards armed and uniformed combatants. Prisoners that are not identifiable by a uniform and armed fall under the category of spies or criminals. They can be tried and, if convicted, punished according to international standards. The Geneva Convention does not contain a standard for detainees.
2006-12-22 12:03:46 · answer #3 · answered by fangtaiyang 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Having visited the sites of actual concentration camps (Dachau, Buchenwald) as well as every detention facility in Iraq, I have to say, there is a marked difference between concentration camps and the US detention facilities. US detainees are currently given every applicable right under the Geneva Convention and more, including classes in basic education, visitation rights, their religious preferences (such as Ramadan) are observed. International groups such as the Red Crescent are allowed access to the detainees, and any violations by Coalition Forces are punished immediately and to the extent the law will allow. Also, while there are exceptions, the vast majority of prisoners being held were detained in the act of attempting to kill or conspiring to kill Coalition forces. Prisoners in the concentration camps were guilty of nothing more than being of the wrong race, political or sexual orientation, and had no rights whatsoever. From the moment of their capture they were treated less than animals and their reason for being detained was not for protection of the citizens of the State, Reich, or Empire, but sheerly for extermination, either out of hatred for who they were born as, or as an uncomfortable political liability to the totalitarian leadership (which was not democratically elected, by the way).
Therefore the answer to your question is, yes, the Geneva Convention does allow us to to have "concentration camps" such as Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib, and thank you for asking.
2006-12-22 15:05:37 · answer #4 · answered by BrandX 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes they are called Prisoner of War (POW) Prisons...even though most of the people there would be called "Illegal Combatants" by the Geneva Convention...read the Convention before you talk about it...only UNIFORMED soldiers are considered POWs...anyone else is an "Illegal Combatant"...a country or army would have to submit to the jurisdiction or have signed the Geneva Convention for it to apply to them...and I have not seen where the Terrorist Organizations go by it or have signed it...do research and quit listening to the Terrorist Propaganda and the Media...questions like this only shows that you are uninformed...
2006-12-22 12:06:17 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The US does NOT have 2 concentration camps at Guantanmo or Abu Gharib. They are prisons for terrorists
who want to kill Americans and anyone else that do not
convert to their "religion."
2006-12-22 12:01:08 · answer #6 · answered by Vagabond5879 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Does the Geneva Convention allow for them to kill civilians, cut intestines out of captured troops and chop peoples heads off?
Name ONE POW camp they have?
Get real.
2006-12-22 12:03:15 · answer #7 · answered by time_wounds_all_heelz 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
How many times have you been to Guantanamo or Abu Gharib? I haven't been there or to the concentration camps. Please tell us what these camps are like.
2006-12-22 12:00:49 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Our two wouldn't look so big if the other side let their prisoners live long enough to have a few of their own!
Ever notice? Or are you too busy listening to Air America?
The worst thing about this? we're in danger of future generations not having a Rambo redux if there's no POW camps to rescue american servicemen from!!!
2006-12-22 11:56:36 · answer #9 · answered by Curt 4 · 5⤊ 0⤋
Wow look, another idiot liberal. When we start gassing the terrorists in Gitmo you let me know. Until then you calling them CONCENTRATION CAMPS is offensive and anti-semitic.
Of course libs want the terrorists on trial in America with Johnny Cochran defending them. "If the burka doesn't fit you must acquit..."
2006-12-22 11:58:15 · answer #10 · answered by x 4 · 5⤊ 1⤋
they are NOT concentration camps,fool! are detainees being starved to death? are they forced to be worked to death? are experiments being performed on them? are they forced to dig their own graves and then murdered? no on all counts.next time try using that maypo that's north of your eyebrows so that your @ss doesn't speak before your mouth does.
2006-12-22 12:00:07 · answer #11 · answered by slabsidebass 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋