SI
SI
discoversearch

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: kumar who wrote (80416)3/8/2003 5:22:00 AM
From: Jacob Snyder  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 281500
 
If we are going to use this hair-splitting and careful re-definitions, and creating new catagories ("unlawful combatants"), as an excuse to do whatever we want for as long as we want, to the people we capture, then other nations can and will do the same thing. The result is chaos, and the further breakdown of international standards of conduct. Which will hurt the U.S. more than any other nation.

In Afghanistan, we made war on a nation, and that nation had a government and an army. And for us to say that the Geneva Convention doesn't apply, is pure sophistry. And Unilateralism. It is just more of our arrogance, telling the world that the rules don't apply to us.



To: kumar who wrote (80416)3/8/2003 8:05:53 AM
From: gregor1 Recommendation  Respond to of 281500
 
>>>US said "war on terrorism" not "war on a state". Inference is "war on AQ"<<<

I disagree. Neither has one single terrorism group been singled out and current administration has not concentrated anti terrorism effort on AQ but on states.