Recent Activity

  • The GOP's Guantanamo Scare Tactics
    Jim commented on the article | over 2 years ago
    The GOP's Guantanamo Scare Tactics

    Barbara misses a couple of important points; we
    designate them as "terrorists" because they were
    engaged in acts of war without being in the
    uniform of, or acting under the discipline of, a
    country.  Under the Geneva Convention, armed
    individuals engaging in combat activities in a war
    zone, or in acts of "sabotage" (like terror
    bombing) while out of uniform have no right to
    surrender and be treated as prisoners of war.
    The rules for dealing with such people under
    the Geneva Convention are harsh, because when
    "civilized war" was contemplated, it was assumed
    that such people were acting on their own behalf,
    and posed special a danger to the combatants
    and civilians in the war zone who were trying to
    play by the rules.   Our Constitution does not
    extend any guarantees to foreign citizens on
    foreign soil; this is one of the main reasons for
    locating this facility in Cuba.  Since they do not
    meet the definition of prisoners of war, bringing
    them here would open numerous legal channels
    that do not apply to them as long as they remain
    on foreign soil.  Further, applying criminal law
    to their cases does does not work to anyone's
    advantage.  Under criminal law, a person who
    deliberately kills another in cold blood because
    of that persons loyalties is a murderer; under
    military law, in most cases such a person is not
    guilty of anything, he's just a soldier doing his job.
    Prisoners of war do not get trials, they are held
    until the conflict is resolved and a treaty providing
    for their repatriation is put in force.  We're much
    better off acting as if these people were regular
    prisoners of war, to the extent this is possible.

  • The GOP's Guantanamo Scare Tactics
    Jim commented on the article | over 2 years ago
    The GOP's Guantanamo Scare Tactics

    The people detained at Guantanamo were captured under circumstances that would
    make them prisoners of war if this were a normal
    war, and if they had been wearing the uniform of
    a country that was a party to the conflict.
    Prisoners of war do not get trials, they are
    typically held until a treaty ends the war and
    provides for their repatriation.  Combatants captured in a war zone who are not wearing uniforms identifying them as soldiers subject to the authority of a country that is a party to the conflict are not accorded any rights or protections under the Geneva Convention or any other international law.  Armed individuals captured
    out of uniform in a war zone can be summarily executed without violating any provision of international law.  The primary reason for creating
    the facility at Guantanamo was that these people
    do not fit any of the available norms; they don't
    meet the legal definition of prisoners of war, nor can they be indicted under our criminal code. But
    as long as they are not on US soil we can hold them as if they were legitimate prisoners of war, without violating our Constitution.  Nothing in our Constitution gives any rights to foreign natonals on foreign soil, and that's what they are as long as they stay in Cuba.

Impact

0 Recruits