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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (87233)	11/19/2004 2:44:56 PM
From: Lane3	Respond to of 793817

I don't understand why it's up to the Constitution to decide how to treat foreign combatants. Sorry, what I was supporting was the notion that we need to update and document how we deal with prisoners in some formal way, which is what I had been advocating earlier. I wasn't looking closely at what vehicle was being proposed in that article. And I don't know enough to recommend a particular vehicle.

To: Ilaine who wrote (87233)	11/19/2004 2:50:39 PM
From: aladin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793817

CB, Anti-american carping is all the euro elites and their upper west side cousins are good for... What I would respect is a call for a new Geneva convention to cover and better define non-uniformed combatants. The trouble is that kind of position would take courage. John

To: Ilaine who wrote (87233)	11/19/2004 3:06:37 PM
From: Captain Jack	Respond to of 793817

V B -- the Geneva Convention does NOT apply to the current situation for a multitude of reasons. Do you think OBL & friends will show up for signing of new accords? We must be civilized-- not for any enemy or world outlook (they do not give a damn) but for our guys when they return. Unlike the terrorists being fought our guys need to know they did what is right in their mind. About the marine that dispatched the terrorist, he did the right thing. In his mind he was correct, by the Geneva Accords he is correct, time for the liberals to admit it too.

To: Ilaine who wrote (87233)	11/19/2004 6:01:02 PM
From: D. Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793817

Which should not be any problem, as far as I can tell. The Geneva Conventions lay out who are enemy combatants, and if a captured person doesn't fit the rules, then they simply don't apply. This means Al Qaeda, for sure. Problem is that international law is dominated by liberal lawyers, who construe the Geneva Conventions as applying to any and all captives and any and all citizens of occupied territory. Of course the conventions don't apply to terrorists, or arguably to non-state guerrilla forces operating in occupied territory. But look at the flack Gonzalez and the law prof at Boalt caught for saying so. Derek