I was watching a guy from human rights watch on fox news and the main complaint seemed to be the shelters. He says that they are open air on one side and exposes the 'detainees' to the elements, which is a violation of the Geneva convention.
"The 1949 Geneva Conventions, ratified but not signed by the United States, require that prisoners of war receive humane treatment, adequate food and delivery of relief supplies, and forbid anyone to pressure prisoners to supply more than a minimum of information. "
http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/europe/01/21/ret.uk.cuba/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/europe/01/21/ret.uk.cuba/index.html
<< dude...shut the fvck up. what if it were one of your relatives in the 9/11 tragedy. You still view these bastards the same way? >>
Speaking hypothetically, yes, I would still view them the same way. Although I am obviously not in that position, I think I would be able to put morals in front of a hunger for vengeance, which obviously many who have posted in this thread cannot.
That aside, however, your statement is ludicrous. Just because I have not been "directly" affected by the attacks, I cannot judge the morality of what we are doing to our POW's? That's rediculous. If anything I would say a bystander like me is MORE effective at judging the morality of our treatment to the POWs without letting my emotions interfere than someone whose relatives were killed in the attacks.
Speaking hypothetically, yes, I would still view them the same way. Although I am obviously not in that position, I think I would be able to put morals in front of a hunger for vengeance, which obviously many who have posted in this thread cannot.
That aside, however, your statement is ludicrous. Just because I have not been "directly" affected by the attacks, I cannot judge the morality of what we are doing to our POW's? That's rediculous. If anything I would say a bystander like me is MORE effective at judging the morality of our treatment to the POWs without letting my emotions interfere than someone whose relatives were killed in the attacks.
ViperXX
Platinum Member
- Nov 2, 2001
- 2,058
- 10
- 81
For all you Care Bears out there why don't you catch a flight to Cuba (if it don't get blow'd up by Al-Queda) and go give all those prisoners a hug and a lolly pop. For god sakes their being held on a Tropical Island in the middle of winter! All you pu$$y cry baby people really get on my nerves.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/attack/2002/01/19/geneva-pressure.htm
Some British legislators asked for a meeting with the U.S. ambassador in London to express concern about the prisoners. "You can't play around with human rights ... and the rights of such prisoners are set out in the Geneva Conventions which both the U.S. and ourselves are signed up to," said Ann Clwyd, chairwoman of Parliament's Human Rights Committee.
Hell, there are even laws in the US Code that refer to the Geneva Convention. http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/2441.html They're making laws with regards to a treaty and we haven't even signed? That makes a whole helluva lot of sense.
What we have not signed or ratified is "Protocol I" and "Protocol II" of the Geneva Conventions.
Some British legislators asked for a meeting with the U.S. ambassador in London to express concern about the prisoners. "You can't play around with human rights ... and the rights of such prisoners are set out in the Geneva Conventions which both the U.S. and ourselves are signed up to," said Ann Clwyd, chairwoman of Parliament's Human Rights Committee.
Hell, there are even laws in the US Code that refer to the Geneva Convention. http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/2441.html They're making laws with regards to a treaty and we haven't even signed? That makes a whole helluva lot of sense.
What we have not signed or ratified is "Protocol I" and "Protocol II" of the Geneva Conventions.
StageLeft
No Lifer
- Sep 29, 2000
- 70,150
- 5
- 0
<< << dude...shut the fvck up. what if it were one of your relatives in the 9/11 tragedy. You still view these bastards the same way? >>
Speaking hypothetically, yes, I would still view them the same way. Although I am obviously not in that position, I think I would be able to put morals in front of a hunger for vengeance, which obviously many who have posted in this thread cannot.
That aside, however, your statement is ludicrous. Just because I have not been "directly" affected by the attacks, I cannot judge the morality of what we are doing to our POW's? That's rediculous. If anything I would say a bystander like me is MORE effective at judging the morality of our treatment to the POWs without letting my emotions interfere than someone whose relatives were killed in the attacks. >>
F**kin eh and you're dead right.
BTW I just noticed that Canada was not on that list. Perhaps the US shoudl send the guys up north and do what they like there
Ok there are a LOT of treaty's from Geneva, hence the reason they call them the conventions (notice the plural). You linked earlier to a treaty for aircraft rights, not prisoner rights. I stand by the reutors article. The US did not sign the "humane treatment of prisoners" treaty although we did ratify it into US law. The distinction is important.
Irregardless, the people being detained were not legal combatants under the defenition of the treaty. They should and will be detained for the rest of their lives. The uproar is occuring because the US still has the death penalty and Euro's fear us executing anyone.
Irregardless, the people being detained were not legal combatants under the defenition of the treaty. They should and will be detained for the rest of their lives. The uproar is occuring because the US still has the death penalty and Euro's fear us executing anyone.
:disgust: Come on! Be serious. As a founding member of the Geneva Convention, we are directed to house our prisoners in the same manner that we house our own troops. By not doing so, we are picking and choosing what Geneva rules we want to follow...that is wrong.
Of course THEY want to kill us! That's why they are prisoners in the first place! Duh!
If we want to be "one nation under God" than we should not put people in cages but house them in a building etc.
We are hypocrites by not doing so.
This is IMHO, that's all.
Of course THEY want to kill us! That's why they are prisoners in the first place! Duh!
If we want to be "one nation under God" than we should not put people in cages but house them in a building etc.
We are hypocrites by not doing so.
This is IMHO, that's all.
Didn't read the thread but...
UK and Sweden are the two countries complaining about this the most. The reason being that there are british and swedish nationals among the prisoners...
...There was american among those prisoners as well, why isn't he in Guantanamo? Why is he getting special treatment?
UK and Sweden are the two countries complaining about this the most. The reason being that there are british and swedish nationals among the prisoners...
...There was american among those prisoners as well, why isn't he in Guantanamo? Why is he getting special treatment?
I was actually watching MSNBC right before I went to bed and saw the story about the prisoners. That night I had the best dream of my life: A Roman-style stadium filled with lions devouring the terrorists while everyone enjoys themselves to pork rinds and pork chops. Later on, they picked up the few that the full lions had reserved as leftovers and stuck a pole through them and set them afire, using the terrorists as light for a party.
I think I've been watching too much Caligula.
Most people here seem to forget that rules are set by rulers, victors. The Geneva Convention was made by victor. If you don't want to follow it, make sure you're on the right side. Again, might equals right.
I think I've been watching too much Caligula.
Most people here seem to forget that rules are set by rulers, victors. The Geneva Convention was made by victor. If you don't want to follow it, make sure you're on the right side. Again, might equals right.
<< ...There was american among those prisoners as well, why isn't he in Guantanamo? Why is he getting special treatment? >>
I've been wondering the same thing. I think John Walker is headed to Virginia from what Rumsfeld said the other day.
...There was american among those prisoners as well, why isn't he in Guantanamo? Why is he getting special treatment?
He's getting special treatment because this is an American war and american rules apply. Get with the program.
He's getting special treatment because this is an American war and american rules apply. Get with the program.
Ok there are a LOT of treaty's from Geneva, hence the reason they call them the conventions (notice the plural). You linked earlier to a treaty for aircraft rights, not prisoner rights. I stand by the reutors article. The US did not sign the "humane treatment of prisoners" treaty although we did ratify it into US law. The distinction is important.
Irregardless, the people being detained were not legal combatants under the defenition of the treaty. They should and will be detained for the rest of their lives. The uproar is occuring because the US still has the death penalty and Euro's fear us executing anyone.
<applause>Excellent clarification</applause>
Irregardless, the people being detained were not legal combatants under the defenition of the treaty. They should and will be detained for the rest of their lives. The uproar is occuring because the US still has the death penalty and Euro's fear us executing anyone.
<applause>Excellent clarification</applause>
<< Ok there are a LOT of treaty's from Geneva, hence the reason they call them the conventions (notice the plural). You linked earlier to a treaty for aircraft rights, not prisoner rights. I stand by the reutors article. The US did not sign the "humane treatment of prisoners" treaty although we did ratify it into US law. The distinction is important.
Irregardless, the people being detained were not legal combatants under the defenition of the treaty. They should and will be detained for the rest of their lives. The uproar is occuring because the US still has the death penalty and Euro's fear us executing anyone. >>
I stand corrected. Can you clarify exactly what they were doing that is considered "illegal combat"? (Referring to both al qaeda and regular taliban fighters)
<< Irregardless, the people being detained were not legal combatants under the defenition of the treaty. They should and will be detained for the rest of their lives. The uproar is occuring because the US still has the death penalty and Euro's fear us executing anyone.
<applause>Excellent clarification</applause>[/i] >>
They might be worried that USA executes EUROPEAN NATIONALS without having a fair trial. It certainly wouldn't be the first time.
Ns1
No Lifer
- Jun 17, 2001
- 55,420
- 1,600
- 126
maybe you guys haven't read the latest news bit?
here
snippets
<< The British team confirmed that the three British prisoners "had no complaints about their treatment," Blair's official spokesman said Monday >>
<< They are in good physical health and there was no sign of any mistreatment. They have also had contact with the Red Cross," said the spokesman, who briefed reporters on condition of anonymity. >>
<< "There were no gags, no goggles, no ear muffs, no shackles while the detainees are in their cells. They only wear shackles ? and only shackles ? when they are outside their cells," Blair's spokesman said. >>
here
snippets
<< The British team confirmed that the three British prisoners "had no complaints about their treatment," Blair's official spokesman said Monday >>
<< They are in good physical health and there was no sign of any mistreatment. They have also had contact with the Red Cross," said the spokesman, who briefed reporters on condition of anonymity. >>
<< "There were no gags, no goggles, no ear muffs, no shackles while the detainees are in their cells. They only wear shackles ? and only shackles ? when they are outside their cells," Blair's spokesman said. >>
<< ...There was american among those prisoners as well, why isn't he in Guantanamo? Why is he getting special treatment?
He's getting special treatment because this is an American war and american rules apply. Get with the program. >>
First of all, this isn't war remember. War was never declared. You could say that USA is holding foreign nationals even though they haven't broken any laws in USA (they were if Afganistan). USA can treat british or swedish-citizens any way they please, but americans get special treatment. Gotcha.
I ask again: why do they treat John Walker with kid gloves while other nationals get brutal treatment? Walker fought against americans just like other did.
<< I have a sick feeling the pacifists and apologists want us to let these terrorists go free. >>
Is anyone suggesting that? Like I said, I haven't read the thread. I don't think this is about should they be punished or not, it
s about how they are treated. Like it or not, they deserve good treatment and fair trial.
How about this link then? Towards the top, click "List of States party to the Conventions and Protocols".
I'm pretty sure it is Convention III of August 1949 that defines the treatment of POWs. The US ratified them all on August 2, 1955. In order for the Senate to ratify the treaty, it first had to be signed.
I'm pretty sure it is Convention III of August 1949 that defines the treatment of POWs. The US ratified them all on August 2, 1955. In order for the Senate to ratify the treaty, it first had to be signed.
<< << I have been to combat
twice for my Country, I think, hell I know I have earned the right to speak aginst these towel heads
in any way that I choose.
How can you think for one monment that these towel heads are human? >> (Emphasis Removed)
I was going to respond to your comment until I got to this part. Sure you have the right to speak however you choose but I refuse to speak intellectually and constructively with a racist. Fought for our country or not, throwing slurs isn't something I enjoy particpating in. >>
so he's a racicist simply becasue he used the word "beloved patriot"? are you kidding me? those prisoners should be tortured and killed. they should be stripped of their rights (if they had any to begin with) and tried under military tribunals. a verdict of guilty should be rendered regardless and they should be sentenced to death. these arent simply soldiers in an army, they are terrorsts killing innocent people. they are killers and pray on innocent people. they should die.
First of all, this isn't war remember. War was never declared. You could say that USA is holding foreign nationals even though they haven't broken any laws in USA (they were if Afganistan). USA can treat british or swedish-citizens any way they please, but americans get special treatment. Gotcha.
The Prez and congress say it isn't a war but I and most other Americans know this is a war. They don't call it war for various reasons. Vietnam wasn't officially a war. BTW, who says Johnnie Walker got special treatment? How do you know? We're you there? All the terrorists are getting exactly what they deserve. Walker was lucky enough to be an Ameican citizen and is treated differently because this is our war and we will abide by our rules.
The Prez and congress say it isn't a war but I and most other Americans know this is a war. They don't call it war for various reasons. Vietnam wasn't officially a war. BTW, who says Johnnie Walker got special treatment? How do you know? We're you there? All the terrorists are getting exactly what they deserve. Walker was lucky enough to be an Ameican citizen and is treated differently because this is our war and we will abide by our rules.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter