Foreign Policy Discussion Thread Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Policy Discussion Thread

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (2168)	1/13/2003 3:56:38 PM
From: zonder	Read Replies (1) of 15987

No, NO, NOOO!! None of them meet the requirements so stated in the Geneva Convention Really? The link you posted said the Taliban were POWs and Al-Qaeda maybe was not. Besides, you are talking about the Article 4.2 of the Geneva Convention re insignia etc. There is also: 4. 3. Members of regular armed forces who profess allegiance to a government or an authority not recognized by the Detaining Power. ... and: 4.6. Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory, who on the approach of the enemy spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, without having had time to form themselves into regular armed units, provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war. They are unlawful combatants from known and unknown locations/nationalities who have taken up arms against the US and it's citizens. You might find it very difficult to argue that the people living in a country who took up arms to defend their home from your invading army have "taken up arms against the US and its citizens" <g> Btw, Rudolf Hess, formerly Hitler's right hand man, was held incommunicado from 1941 until the post WWII Nuremburg trials in 1946 Possibly because the Geneva Convention entered into force in 1950.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next