- #1
OAQfirst
- 23
- 3
A debate is on whether the Bush Administration can be charged for war crimes. Regarding the Geneva conventions:
Is al Qaida an entity separate from a state? While they are an organization, is it demonstrated that they are not citizens of the countries they reside in? Was Afghanistan a party to the treaties and would that matter?
He also challenges the administration's argument that Common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, prohibiting inhumane treatment of detainees, isn't binding. "The standard is not torture. It's humane treatment. That's a much higher standard," he said, noting that after World War II, the U.S. prosecuted Japanese soldiers for using waterboarding on American troops.
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/58210.html [Broken]However, Common Article 2 of the treaties says that the conventions apply to a conflict between two states that are party to the treaties, and the administration points out that al Qaida doesn't fit that description. In addition, the Military Commissions Act of 2006 specifies what sort of conduct can be punished and appears to give administration officials cover.
Is al Qaida an entity separate from a state? While they are an organization, is it demonstrated that they are not citizens of the countries they reside in? Was Afghanistan a party to the treaties and would that matter?
Last edited by a moderator: