Habeas Corpus Still Applies

Remove all ads!

Barmy: Because I believe teenagers shouldn't be flying over and fighting in militias? Or because I believe that said teens should be held responsible for their behaviour?

Ragusa, your post was insightful -- as I think I have mentioned before, this "third class" of prisoner doesn't sit well with me either. You are accurate in that the administration totally screwed the pooch on this one.

That said, what should the US do with Khadr? Release him and ask him politely not to do it again? The guy killed a US soldier. Now he's been captured. If he's a soldier, then hold him under the articles of the Geneva convention which as I understand from the previous posts would mean that he's gonna be held for a long time because the organization he was fighting for is not a government and isn't likely to ask for him back. If he's a citizen, then try him on that basis. I agree that this limbo deal is not cool, but what some posters seem to be saying is that he should be treated like some poor little victim instead of making him be responsible for his actions. That sort of enabling excuse making is not going to help anyone.

 

At the end of the day, IF they are militia men and captured, they are still fighting in a war, same as the American soldiers and should be treated according to the Geneva convention as POW's. Certainly not held illegally (indefinitely without charge in some cases), tried and executed. Execution is a failure of humanity whenever it happens, certainly so when it's not justified. During WW2 we didn't execute captured Nazi soldiers, we treated them properly. Are these guys worse than Nazis?

The US thinks its a law unto itself far too often. The whole Gitmo mess is a travesty Americans should be ashamed of. I've even heard of there being ships where 'suspects' are held indefinitely, too. Disgraceful.

 

Ragusa, i don't & never have approved of everything any administration has done. Even clinton managed to get a few things right during his time in office.
Now my above post asking you about me posting about enemy combatants was posted rather late at night. I seem to remember way back when reading something you (or possibly drew) had written on the subject but for the life of me i can't remember replying.
I really don't see a problem with the established categories(2) however wasn't there something in the GC about people caught out of uniform commiting acts of aggresion being subject to summary execution as spys?

 

No, there is nothing in the Geneva Conventions about summary execution. Spies are to be considered civilians who commit criminal acts, as ordinary criminals. Which deprives them of POW status and all privileges involved, and which, considering the penalty for espionage, murder and the like in many countries, can mean just that.

Until the end of WW-II and before the Geneva Conventions summary execution was common. The excesses during the war, especially as far as summary executions and collective punishment are concerned, were the main driving forces being the enactment of the Geneva Conventions after the war. These experiences also explain the universal support the Geneva Conventions received from the very beginning.

 

So verify the guilt of the ones who are, find out those who aren't & fairly compensate them for their imprisonment & straighten everything out. I know it's not that simple but you get the gist of it.

 

Possible, or simply as criminals, as Ragusa said. They are to be treated just as ordinary civilians, and if they are found guilty of a crime for which there is a capital punishment, they can be killed. I wouldn't be surprised if the Iraqi law proscribes death penalty for crimes such as rigging car bombs or attacking Iraqi army units; I'm not quite sure how the US army qualifies.

The problem is, of course, with militias it's hard to recognize just what counts as uniform. In WWII, some of the worst atrocities of the Wehrmacht were in pursuit of Russian or Serbian partisans, who afaik didn't always have uniforms. I'd think the Geneva convention would at least expect to cover such cases.

 

One thing to point out - in general you're much better off being declared an enemy soldier - and thus a POW - as you are being considered a civilian. Many people are (falsely) concluding that it is better to be considered a civilian, when in reality the opposite is usually true.