[voodoo]

http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/07/...0711detain.php

In a sweeping change of policy, the Pentagon has decided that it will treat all detainees in compliance with the minimum standards spelled out in the Geneva conventions, a senior defense official said today.

..why the policy change I hear you ask.. well:

The new policy comes on the heels of a Supreme Court ruling last month invalidating a system of military tribunals the Pentagon had created to try suspected terrorists, and just before Congress takes up the question of a replacement system in a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing today.

As part of its decision, the court found that a key provision of the Geneva conventions, known as Common Article 3, did apply to terror suspects, contradicting the position taken by the Bush administration.

Well, that's that then. May as well close the bloody thing now, eh?

I think this is a good thing and a valuable lesson. Nobody is above or benieth the law. Good news (and they say good news is never reported!)

V

[von Wrangell]

Oh how I can't wait for Simey to tell us all how this actually doesn't mean what we think it does and how Bush was right all along.


:gets popcorn and cola:

[Athens]

about time, now i wait to see if they actually change a thing, then perhaps I can start respecting the US a little more.

[kobi]

Can't wait for Simey's response either. He'll just call some names and say that were all stupid etc........just like he's been told to do.

[Millennium]

The hell of it is that the Geneva Treaty shouldn't have even been needed to be called into play; this was unconstitutional on its face. But if the Geneva Treaty will get the government to correct this grave abuse, then so be it.

[Y3a]

Thats why all those captured on the battlefield should be harshly questoned - even using drugs and torture, and then they should be killed and left on the battlefield with the rest of the dead.

Rules??? In a Knife fight?

[analogika]

Dude, this ain't West Side Story.

[BRussell]

You know something has been going wrong when the headlines say "US to follow Geneva Conventions."

[Moderator]

Guys guys lets not play the blame game I'd rather see us move forward than have these monday morning quarterbacks play politics with the safety of the American people. the adminsitration has great respect for these activist judges who obviously want Osama Bin Laden to win or they WOULDN'T DARE DISPUTE THE POWER OF THE PRESIDENT IN A TIME OF WAR!!!

[TETENAL]

Originally Posted by Moderator

the adminsitration has great respect for these activist judges who obviously want Osama Bin Laden to win or they WOULDN'T DARE DISPUTE THE POWER OF THE PRESIDENT IN A TIME OF WAR!!!

Is this sarcasm?

[Moderator]

oh ya

[PacHead]

This is a terrible decision, terrorists do not qualify for protection under the euroweenie convention. Hopefully US troops will kill more and capture less from now on. The best kind of terrorists are the kinds that aren't breathing anymore.

[Pendergast]

Originally Posted by PacHead

Glad you approve. Rogue nations need guidance and it is great news that the U.S. will now follow some kind of ethics.

Now we can do real work on those terrorists, and gain confidence from other nations that Justice will prevail.

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by Pendergast

and gain confidence from other nations that Justice will prevail.

…because nothing will strike fear into the hearts of terrorists like Europe's approval of our policies…

[goMac]

Originally Posted by PacHead

This is a terrible decision, terrorists do not qualify for protection under the euroweenie convention. Hopefully US troops will kill more and capture less from now on. The best kind of terrorists are the kinds that aren't breathing anymore.

...how do you know that everyone at Gitmo is a terrorist? Do you have some inside source? Do you work there?

See. This is what the Geneva convention is for. So we know who they are holding.

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by smacintush

…because nothing will strike fear into the hearts of terrorists like Europe's approval of our policies…

Europe? Try 'the rest of the civilized world'. And lots of the not so civilized part.

V

[black bear theory]

Originally Posted by PacHead

This is a terrible decision, terrorists do not qualify for protection under the euroweenie convention. Hopefully US troops will kill more and capture less from now on. The best kind of terrorists are the kinds that aren't breathing anymore.

well, if the terrorists are caught doing terrorist things in terrorist countries (and presumably not judged on the battlefield), why is it so hard to try them on, say, terrorism charges.

only 10 of the 450 (about 2%) current detainees have, to date, had charges levelled against them. three years is a long time to form some kind of case against these guys - gather intelligence and evidence, etc. otherwise, three years is a long time to keep these people in limbo.

i am happy that there will be some justice done.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by goMac

...how do you know that everyone at Gitmo is a terrorist?

Well, they're at Gitmo, aren't they? They must be terrorists. I mean, innocent people are never put in prison.

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by PacHead

This is a terrible decision, terrorists do not qualify for protection under the euroweenie convention. Hopefully US troops will kill more and capture less from now on. The best kind of terrorists are the kinds that aren't breathing anymore.

Whatever, the decision has been made. You lose.

V

[ghporter]

The issue was really how to treat combatants that didn't fit in a nice little niche. They didn't wear uniforms, but they did behave like combatants. They shot at us, but from schools, hospitals, mosques, etc. On its face that makes them "unlawful combatants," and the Conventions are noticably silent on what to do with such combatants.

Now the real problem with this is that the administration chose the extreme (for the U.S.) position that these detainees were completely out of the scope of international law. I for one don't think they earn Geneva Convention protections because of the way they fought. But that would mean that they don't get the specific "benefits" of the Convention, such as being provided tobacco...

This does NOT mean that they should be treated like they were arrested in Times Square for spraypainting on the storefronts! They are not being held on criminal charges. Instead they are being held as prisoners subsequent to combat-this is NOT a U.S. criminal issue, and the need for lawyers during their captivity is a wonder to me-did any of OUR POWs in Vietnam, North Korea, Japan, or Germany get lawyers to argue against their captivity? No, because they were captured IN THE PROGRESS OF A WAR. That's the situation of most of the Guantanamo detaines: they were captured during wartime combat operations.

A lot of people are not going to be happy about one offshoot of considering these people POWs under Geneva. That's because a POW can be held indefinitely until the end of the conflict. I do not see the War on Terror ending in the next few years.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by smacintush

…because nothing will strike fear into the hearts of terrorists like Europe's approval of our policies…

Actually, it's the approval of your Judicial branch, not Europe, that your administration sought.

[ink]

Originally Posted by Athens

about time, now i wait to see if they actually change a thing, then perhaps I can start respecting the US a little more.

Well, I'm glad that someone in the government decided to actually provide a check and a balance to the executive power Bush has been gobbling up. It took long enough.

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak

Actually, it's the approval of your Judicial branch, not Europe, that your administration sought.

Actually, you need to read the post to which I was replying…

[PacHead]

Originally Posted by voodoo

Whatever, the decision has been made. You lose.

V

Whatever, I'm sure that terrorists are still going to get the crap kicked out of them. Some terrorist somewhere (in some undisclosed location of course) is probably wearing a panty on their head at this very moment while being interrogated.

[PacHead]

Since the US is now granting these terrorist hoodlums protection under the Geneva convention, then that means that they're POW's and they won't be getting out anytime soon. They're to be held until the war is over, that might be decades away. Hopefully the terrorists will rot in prison and die there without ever being let out, fair is fair and the US should abide by these rules.

[PacHead]

Originally Posted by ghporter

A lot of people are not going to be happy about one offshoot of considering these people POWs under Geneva. That's because a POW can be held indefinitely until the end of the conflict. I do not see the War on Terror ending in the next few years.

Exactly, that's what I was thinking too.

Nobody, not anti-USA Liberals or terrorist loving Eurotrash can whine when these POW"s are held for decades or until they die.

[kvm_mkdb]

Originally Posted by ghporter

they were captured IN THE PROGRESS OF A WAR.

Which is why the Geneva Convention applies to them. Be them regular or irregular combatants - there are no 'illegal' ones. The GC has been written for all people captured in a war, independently of the labels attached to them. If they are guilty of the war crimes you describe above they are irregulars that commited warcrimes - IANAL but I don't think that applying the GC to them would mean anything else but that a system of checks and balances is put into place instead of the barbarity of Gitmo.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by PacHead

Exactly, that's what I was thinking too.

Nobody, not anti-USA Liberals or terrorist loving Eurotrash can whine when these POW"s are held for decades or until they die.

I think the US will be hard pressed to define the war these POW's were captured in as the War on Terror as opposed to the war against Afghanistan or the war against Iraq.

[Taliesin]

Originally Posted by voodoo

Europe? Try 'the rest of the civilized world'. And lots of the not so civilized part.

V

That reads so Hitchhiker-guide-to-the-galaxy-like.

Back on topic, it's good news that the prisoners get finally some rights as POWs, but the other revealed news was that the US holds currently about 1,000+ POW's or terrorists around the world, although it's currently unclear where those are held that are not from among the 450 ones of Guantanamo.

Taliesin

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by PacHead

Since the US is now granting these terrorist hoodlums protection under the Geneva convention, then that means that they're POW's and they won't be getting out anytime soon. They're to be held until the war is over, that might be decades away. Hopefully the terrorists will rot in prison and die there without ever being let out, fair is fair and the US should abide by these rules.

Yes. The US should declare all the prisoners held at Guantanamo as POWs and treat them as such. That is what I have been arguing for all along, playing by the rules. Because guess what, playing by the rules allows the US to hold these guys "until the war is over, [which] might be decades away". So be it. If we don't declare "victory" in the war on terror for another generation then we will have lots of old POWs in Gitmo.


You see, we CAN play by the rules and still get what we want.

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by kvm_mkdb

Which is why the Geneva Convention applies to them. Be them regular or irregular combatants - there are no 'illegal' ones. The GC has been written for all people captured in a war, independently of the labels attached to them. If they are guilty of the war crimes you describe above they are irregulars that commited warcrimes - IANAL but I don't think that applying the GC to them would mean anything else but that a system of checks and balances is put into place instead of the barbarity of Gitmo.

There is a difference between "irregular" combatants and "illegal" combatants. The French Resistance were "irregulars," but they had visible and recognized insignia while fighting (often a scarf and a beret) that identified them and followed the accepted rules of combat. "Illegal" combatants are not "irregulars" (which are covered by Geneva) because they neither identify themselves as combatants through insignia, nor do they follow the accepted rules of combat. These "illegal combatants" HIDE their combatant status through SPECIFICALLY NOT wearing identifying insignia, and they hide in protected places like religious buildings and hospitals or erect faux hospital camps to fight from. This specifically forfeits any protection as an irregular combatant. This is a VERY IMPORTANT distinction. The insurgents in Iraq are ILLEGAL combatants, NOT A RESISTANCE FORCE. If they want to step up to the plate as resistance, let 'em play by the rules. Otherwise they're cowardly thugs that hide behind women, children and the aged. You cannot be an "irregular that commits war crimes" if you were never an irregular to begin with. These slime (both those at Guantanamo and currently in Iraq and Afghanistan) were war criminal slime from the begining.

And how do you define "barbarity?" Proper food daily, clean living conditions, extraordinary accomodations for religious activities? The only force used that I've heard of is trying to keep them from killing themselves, and that hasn't been 100% successful.

[Y3a]

Perhaps you can get OBL to sign the Geneva Convention too? That would certainly make a worthless piece of paper.

[analogika]

Y3a, why do you hate America so?

You and PacHead seem to completely abhor all the values your country once stood for.

[besson3c]

I would like to see Y3a and Pachead in a steel caged death match. These guys both have a lot of balls, and aren't afraid to demonstrate this!


.... it's too bad they don't always display their intellect in their incredibly over-the-top "kill anything that looks, smells, or sounds like a terrorist" bit. Do you guys not see some fallicy to this approach?

[PacHead]

Originally Posted by besson3c

.... it's too bad they don't always display their intellect in their incredibly over-the-top "kill anything that looks, smells, or sounds like a terrorist" bit. Do you guys not see some fallicy to this approach?

If it looks like a terrorist and it smells like a terrorist and it talks like a terrorist, well then guess what, it is a terrorist.



Liberals need to stop defending and helping people who are waging war against the US.

[Dakar]

I swear these guys love this stuff. An opportunity for the US to act big and tough and flex it muscles and assert dominance? These guys probably get bored during peacetime.

[PacHead]

Originally Posted by Dakar

I swear these guys love this stuff. An opportunity for the US to act big and tough and flex it muscles and assert dominance? These guys probably get bored during peacetime.

It's good to be on the dominant side during a war, especially when you're the side that has been attacked, wouldn't you agree ? Would you prefer that the US was the weaker side? Is that what Liberals want ? No wonder Liberals are becoming more and more irrelevant in politics for every passing day. The worst of the Liberals engage in traitorism.

[Dakar]

I don't mean assert dominance as in win the war. I mean show everybody 'we are the alpha male.'

[PacHead]

Originally Posted by Dakar

I don't mean assert dominance as in win the war. I mean show everybody 'we are the alpha male.'

That's basic psychology right there. Humans haven't evolved that far from the ape and when dealing with terrorists especially, it's best to speak to them in a language that even simple creatures like they can comprehend.

[Dakar]

Originally Posted by PacHead

That's basic psychology right there. Humans haven't evolved that far from the ape and when dealing with terrorists especially, it's best to speak to them in a language that even simple creatures like they can comprehend.

Yeah, this has nothing to do with what I'm saying.

[PacHead]

Originally Posted by Dakar

Yeah, this has nothing to do with what I'm saying.

It does, I'm saying that it's good to show everybody that we're the alpha male,.

[Dakar]

And I'm saying you love having a chance to do it.

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by PacHead

It does, I'm saying that it's good to show everybody that we're the alpha male,.

One day, you will win the Darwin awards.

V

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by Dakar

And I'm saying you love having a chance to do it.

I think you're right. Y3a and PacHead seem like the type that relish conflict and enjoy violence. It's kinda sad but there are a LOT of American males who exhibit this particular trait of patriotic muscle-flexing and macho bravura. There seems to be this strange under-current in American masculine identity that relishes gratuitous violence.

[PacHead]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy

I think you're right. Y3a and PacHead seem like the type that relish conflict and enjoy violence.

Only when it involves dead terrorists and enemies of the US, you seem to forget that the US is at war. What is the best way to win wars ? Violence and destruction and then more violence and destruction, that's what, the more, the better. Lots of dead enemy bodies, massive piles of dead enemy bodies. Whatever it takes.

[Spliffdaddy]

finally. Under the Geneva convention we are legally within our rights to execute the detainees. A bullet to the head sure stops the whining.

Looks like the peaceniks were led to their own noose - by Dubya.

[Y3a]

Originally Posted by analogika

Y3a, why do you hate America so?

You and PacHead seem to completely abhor all the values your country once stood for.

HA! I LOVE AMERICA.

I HATE the bastardization of it by the liberals and those who wish to rape her and over run her.
I hate the godless terrorists who are killing and causing chaos throughout the world in the name of "Allah."
I hate those who are playing word games and misinterpreting laws, intents and adding their stupid concept of "living Documents" to any place that might seem convenient.

The majority of Americans don't read the news, or understand the real world around them, and they are easy prey to the slimey press and the lies and half-truths that make their decisions at the ballot box faulty, and their perception of events tainted by the BS of the NoooZ outlets..

Idealism is great when your 18-23 or so, but when you DO grow up you need to actually think in the long term. I haven't seen any of that from you lefties.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by Y3a

HA! I LOVE AMERICA.

I HATE the bastardization of it by the liberals and those who wish to rape her and over run her.
I hate the godless terrorists who are killing and causing chaos throughout the world in the name of "Allah."
I hate those who are playing word games and misinterpreting laws, intents and adding their stupid concept of "living Documents" to any place that might seem convenient.

Oddly, the documents we hold in such high regard were written largely by YOUR GOVERNMENT - albeit sixty and more years ago.

Of course, seeing the contempt you have for your own Constitution, it's hardly surprising that this means nothing to you.

Originally Posted by Y3a

The majority of Americans don't read the news, or understand the real world around them, and they are easy prey to the slimey press and the lies and half-truths that make their decisions at the ballot box faulty, and their perception of events tainted by the BS of the NoooZ outlets..

That DOES explain why the majority of Americans voted for the Bush/Cheney ticket.

Very succinctly put, btw.

Originally Posted by Y3a

Idealism is great when your 18-23 or so, but when you DO grow up you need to actually think in the long term. I haven't seen any of that from you lefties.

Most of us learned in Kindergarten that violence doesn't ever solve any problems in the long term.

[typoon]

Originally Posted by analogika

Most of us learned in Kindergarten that violence doesn't ever solve any problems in the long term.

really? So if you beat that bully up that is picking on you he won't stop or at least think twice about doing it again?

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

finally. Under the Geneva convention we are legally within our rights to execute the detainees. A bullet to the head sure stops the whining.

Looks like the peaceniks were led to their own noose - by Dubya.

This peacenik has wanted the US to simply play by the rules. And, he finally got that. The prisoners in Gitmo are now desginated POWs with all the rights AND responsibilities that comes with such a designation. And yes, if after the end of the war we hold trials for our prisoners--I think we can't hold trials until hostilities have ceased--and they are found guilty of crimes warranting the death penalty, then yes, by all means, let's have some executions. But let's do it BY THE RULES instead of making up rules.