Sojourner553

"Suddenly, the government of the United States has discovered the virtues of international law. It may be waging an illegal war against a sovereign state; it may be seeking to destroy every treaty which impedes its attempts to run the world, but when five of its captured soldiers were paraded in front of the Iraqi television cameras on Sunday, Donald Rumsfeld, the US defence secretary, immediately complained that "it is against the Geneva convention to show photographs of prisoners of war in a manner that is humiliating for them.

'''
This being so, Rumsfeld had better watch his back. For this enthusiastic convert to the cause of legal warfare is, as head of the defence department, responsible for a series of crimes sufficient, were he ever to be tried, to put him away for the rest of his natural life.

His prison camp in Guantanamo Bay, in Cuba, where 641 men (nine of whom are British citizens) are held, breaches no fewer than 15 articles of the third convention.

..."




http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/st...921192,00.html

themistocles

Uh oh, not letting al-Qaeda write home or have canteens, Nuremburg, Nuremburg!

lpetrich

So you think that the Administration is not bound by the Geneva Conventions while Saddam Hussein is?

Which makes me think: if Saddam decides that our POW's are "unlawful combatants", the Seedling would likely go into such a rage that he would order a nuclear attack on Baghdad.

Jane Bovary

I think you've missed the point themistocles.

Rumsfield's got some gall. There's a thread about it already.

Here

themistocles

No, I don't find uniform and absolute value in any of the various laws which constitute the various Geneva agreements.

I don't have a problem with questioning al-Qaeda operatives and posing them before the world's cameras to prove that we're not abusing them in any meaningful use of the word "abuse". I would have a problem with Saddam shooting our prisoners after surrendering should that occurr.

Personally, I think that's a reasonable stance.

themistocles

No, I get it, I just don't complaining about Rumsfield's position holds a lot of water, especially if one complaining truly believed in the Geneva agreements. Hypocrisy on both sides is so utterly blinding, that it seems people are willing to abandon their principles in order to stick it to the other guys. Although, I stand by my "half of Geneva is ballyho", so I happily stand aside.

peacenik

They should either treat them as Prisoner's or war and as such entitled to all the protections that POWs are afforded under the Geneva Conventions, or they should be tried before an impartial tribunal and be given an opportunity to at least prove their innocence. The administration can't have its cake and eat it too; Either their POWs or their simply alleged lawbreakers in which case they have a right to a speedy trial.

Five have already been released with apparently no explanation as to why they were held so long. When the Ashcroft Justice Department begins trying American Citizens in secret or worse yet simply holding them indefinitely without any charges being brought against them as the detainees at Guantanimo Bay are being done, perhaps America will wake up to the fact that our liberties are being shredded!!

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/wnt/D...nni030112.html