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: FaultLine who wrote (118062)	10/30/2003 12:08:21 AM
From: Bilow	Respond to of 281500

Hi FaultLine; Foreign affairs are simple if you follow the precepts that were taught to us as children. The wisest of these is that "what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander". Or "do unto others what you would have others do unto you". They did not teach you that "He who has the gold (or the guns) makes the rules", which is a rule for atheists or members of the Mafia. Another one that bears repeating is "vengenance is mine, sayeth the Lord", which tells us that (a) we are not the world's policeman, (b) we are not the world's jury, (c) we are not the world's judge, (d) we are not the world's prosecutor, (e) we damn sure aren't all the above four at the same time, and (f) we should not expect to obtain revenge in this world. -- Carl

To: FaultLine who wrote (118062)	10/30/2003 2:09:39 AM
From: KLP	Respond to of 281500

U.S. Troops Detain Dozens in Iraq Raid apnews.myway.com Oct 29, 11:02 PM (ET) By KATARINA KRATOVAC (AP) Lt.Col. Steven Russell, center, commander of U.S. Army 4th Infantry Division 1-22 Infantry... TIKRIT, Iraq (AP) - American soldiers carried out pre-dawn raids Thursday in Saddam Hussein's hometown and detained more than a dozen suspects, some believed to be involved in setting up a new terrorist cell, the U.S. military said. Under the cover of darkness, 4th Infantry Division troops fanned out across downtown Tikrit, 120 miles north of Baghdad, raiding six houses. U.S. forces had "reliable intelligence" that the suspects were involved in establishing a "new terrorist network in Tikrit and planning terrorist attacks against coalition forces," Lt. Col. Steve Russell told The Associated Press after the operation. The area around Tikrit has been the scene of increased attacks on U.S. troops that coalition forces blame on Saddam supporters and members of his Fedayeen militia. This region in northern Iraq is part of the Sunni Triangle, an area to the north and west of Baghdad that is considered a hotbed of anti-American sentiment. U.S. troops detained 14 suspects, including four identified as "targeted individuals," said Russell, the commander of the 1st Battalion, 22nd Infantry Regiment of the 4th Infantry Division. Russell said the other 10 men were taken into custody for questioning because they were closely related to the four and could provide "additional information." "We continue to work against these cells, to disrupt, capture or kill them," Russell said. Sweeping into two houses at a time, the troops took all the men found on the premises into the courtyards, allowing women and children to remain inside the homes. The men were told to kneel on the ground as troops put hoods put over their heads and tied their hands behind their backs. Later, the men were led to a field near a local school and lined up against the school wall. The wall was painted with pro-Saddam graffiti and calls for Jihad, or Holy War, in Arabic: "God, our land, our president" and "Youth of Tikrit, rise up against Americans." An older man, the father of two of the suspects, was released and returned to his home while the rest were trucked away. The raiders discovered false identification cards and multiple fake license plates with "official government stickers" in one of the houses, Russell said. "This is obviously an early indication of the activity they were involved in," he added. The raiders have successfully cracked down on anti-coalition supporters in the region in the past, often acting upon local intelligence and tips from informants sympathetic to the efforts of the troops. "The trust in us has increased because we have put many bad guys away," Russell said.

To: FaultLine who wrote (118062)	10/30/2003 3:08:02 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

ken, the distinction between criminals and combatants is fairly clear, as are the reasons why they are treated differently. Carl's distinction is a nice rhetorical flourish that doesn't stand up to scrutiny. War is the legal use of organized violence on the part of one state or group against another. The instruments of violence--soldiers--follow orders. Unless they commit an universally repugnant crime such as genocide, soldiers cannot be held criminally responsible for using violence against enemy combatants or their resources in a formal or informal conflict. In other words, they do not possess the status of criminals under the Geneva Convention and international law so long as they conduct warfare along prescribed methods. Hence, their incarceration is not deemed punitive. They are simply assets of a nation at war that have suffered the misfortune of having been captured. Naturally, emotions run high during warfare and POWs run the risk of being mistreated. The Geneva Convention recognizes these risks; it is the more or less global effort to make sure that prisoners of war are treated humanely while the conflict lasts. Though there are exceptions (and rules under the Convention) for criminal behavior taking place after a POW is captured, POWs are not accorded the procedural rights given to criminals under domestic law because they are not deemed under international law to be criminals. Simple as that. Criminal behavior, on the other hand, involves activity in derogation of social mores designed to protect a society from what it considers to be acts that are destructive to it. If the crimes involve violence, they are in usurpation of the state's monopoly on the regulation and execution of violent acts. Our system requires a high level of proof in order to punish those who commit crimes. International law does not accuse POWs of a crime; they are not to be to be punished for following lawful orders. Since they are merely in captivity until the conflict is resolved and are entitled to repatriation at the end of the conflict, their only rights are to be treated humanely according to the terms of the Convention, assuming of course that the POWs' country is a signatory, while they are in custody and made unavailable as assets to be used against the capturing power. The terrorists and AQ cannot claim the benefits of the Geneva Convention because no country has said that the Gitmo POWs are their combatants so as to invoke the terms of the Convention. I don't think any will. Despite this, I think they are probably being given the equivalent treatment required by the Convention. Since we are at war with terror, at least informally, I think we are well within our rights to take away these enemy assets during the time the conflict exists so that they cannot be used against us. I don't think we need to accuse them of a crime. The legal problem I see is defining when this ill-defined conflict ends so that they may be repatriated. I see it as a problem they have brought upon themselves. The equities certainly favor keeping these guys in captivity so as to prevent them from acting against us. To sum up a wordy post, the reason POWs are not treated as criminal defendants is that they are not generally considered criminals under international law. Why the need to counsel, bail, to a trial by a jury of their peers, and all the rest of the procedural safeguards we afford criminal defendants, if there is no criminal accusation and no punishment imposed upon them other than the legally sanctioned incarceration during the time the conflict exists?