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: Thomas M. who wrote (89195)4/2/2003 1:32:33 PM
From: Neeka  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
I took your advise and did a Google search.

I found a staggering amount of information supporting both sides of this issue.

From your link:

Under the Geneva Conventions, captured fighters are considered prisoners of war (POWs) if they are members of an adversary state´s armed forces or are part of an identifiable militia group that abides by the laws of war. Al-Qaeda members, who neither wear identifying insignia nor abide by the laws of war, probably would not quality. Taliban soldiers, as the armed forces of Afghanistan, may well be entitled to POW status. If there is doubt about a captured fighter's status as a POW, the Geneva Conventions require that he be treated as such until a competent tribunal determines otherwise.

hrw.org

Although I realize that Human Rights Watch would prefer that the unlawful combatants be housed in something akin to the Hilton, and of course no one would deny them their opinion, they are not the last word on the subject.

The arguments seems to be over what constitutes humane treatment.

Here is another perspective from Globalsecruity.org

globalsecurity.org

A statement by the Red Cross:

WHY THE RED CROSS IS VISITING DETAINEES IN GUANTANAMO BAY

redcross.org

From the CDI (Center of Defense Information)

Clearly, a thorough investigation and analysis of relevant laws are needed before the status of the detainees at Guantanamo Bay can be established. And it is neither the task of the Department of Defense nor of any international organization to determine the legal status of the prisoners; according to the most prevalent interpretations of the Geneva Conventions, they have the right to be heard by an independent judge to have their POW status granted or denied. Such hearings, which would have to begin promptly to settle intensifying disputes, would assure U.S. allies and human rights groups that fairness ruled over the decision and that the United States heeded to international law in determining the fate of the prisoners.

cdi.org

I could go on, but I won't. There is no doubt that this is being monitored by all interested parties, but imo it is ridiculous as well as disingenuous to make the statement that the US is using the Geneva Convention as toilet paper.

Nor does it advance the cause of understanding and cooperation between people.

M