Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (10322)	11/14/2001 11:54:53 AM
From: arun gera	Respond to of 281500

From whatever I have read, the Talibans were required a strict dress code as well as a "cosmetics" code. As close to uniform one can get. Of course if the International Law only considers fatigues as uniform, that is a different matter. >>Actually, given that they weren't in any "official" uniform, they can be considered to not enjoy the same specific rights as uniformed soldiers. They could technically be considered "guerillas, spies, or saboteurs". But that's getting into the technicalities of international law and the Geneva convention... >>

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (10322)	11/14/2001 8:11:31 PM
From: Bilow	Respond to of 281500

Hi Hawkmoon; Re: "Actually, given that they weren't in any "official" uniform, they can be considered to not enjoy the same specific rights as uniformed soldiers. They could technically be considered "guerillas, spies, or saboteurs". But that's getting into the technicalities of international law and the Geneva convention." The technicalities of the Geneva Convention protects the lives of saboteurs, as long as they don't kill anyone. In order to (legally) execute them, you have to do some sort of trial, I would suppose. Besides, the NA didn't sign the Geneva Convention, I'd be willing to bet. -- Carl