Does Common Article 2 of the GC apply to al Qaida?

[mgb_phys]

I suspect torture work on a tactical scale - grabbing one member of an enemy ambush in the field and 'questioning' them about the number of opposing forces is likely to be useful.

Holding some foreign kids who went to fight for their beliefs (ie. idiots) for 7 years in case they know of future Al-Queada attacks seems unlikely. Rather like the Germans holding Brits or Americans who went to fight in the Spanish civil war in case they know the plans for D-Day.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

In fact, I think using outright mercenaries is acceptable. You're fighting a war to win, you're not playing intercollegiate sports. The very survival of your country might be at stake and you ought to fight with the best fighting forces you can come up with, even if you have to buy them.

As far as how these persons are to be treated would you find persons fighting for their own country and persons fighting for monetary profit to be more or less equal?

In any event, I find any discussion about detainee abuse based on technicalities or based on whether they work or not to be slightly disgusting.

If nothing else when we observe people taking refuge behind such technicalities it shows us flaws in the legal system that perhaps ought to be fixed. Unfortunately international law is much more difficult to repair.

 

[Art]

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?

It is irrelevant whether or not al-Qaida forces fight for a recognised gov't or organisation as specifically spelled out in GC III Article 4(3). Afghani born fighters are further protected by Article 4(6)

Yes, Afghanistan is a signatory and no it wouldn't matter if they were not as the US and British gov'ts are signatories and so are bound by it's provisions.

There is no doubt there are ample grounds for an investigation into some of the many allegations of war crimes committed by alliance members but in a world where the maxim of 'might is right' is paramount, it is is extremely unlikely any members of Bush's administration, and I'm thinking of Rumsfeld in particular here, will ever face justice which is unfortunate not only as it means criminal behaviour will go unpunished but also because these new lower standards will no doubt be seized upon by others to justify future breaches of the Conventions. Next time it could be US or British forces being tortured or massacred.

 

[mheslep]

That defense was tried in Nuremberg. Jews aren't a state but you can still commit war crimes against them...

There were other defences tried but not parallel to this. The Jews of Europe were indeed citizens of the various European states, no question. AQ members are, in legal terms, non-state actors.

 

[jreelawg]

I think it's important to consider Section 2, Article 118 of Convention III: "Prisoners of war shall be released and repatriated without delay after the cessation of active hostilities."

So *if* the Al-Qaida members were considered prisoners of war under the GC, then they'd have to be released after the US pulled out of Afghanistan and Iraq...

Aren't we officially at war with terrorism, not Afghanistan? If we are at war with terrorism, then I don't see why the enemy combatants shouldn't qualify as POW's, and I don't see why exiting Afghanistan would mean detainees must be released.

I hope Obama makes some serious changes to the whole kidnap and torture first, gather evidence and try later thing. How they have things going, they could kidnap anyone and claim suspected terrorism while meanwhile the person rots in a cell in some undisclosed located undergoing who know what.

 

[mgb_phys]

Aren't we officially at war with terrorism, not Afghanistan? .

We are also at;
war on drugs
war on poverty
war on crime
war on want
and possibly war on broccoli

 

[jreelawg]

We are also at;
war on drugs
war on poverty
war on crime
war on want
and possibly war on broccoli

Is that a war on drugs, or a war, on drugs?Anyways, if we weren't officially at war, then we would not be aloud to imprison the people in the first place without a trial. If they are to be treated as civilians, then they should be aloud to have a lawer and a trial before being punished.

I have a feeling that the Bush administration is going to look pretty bad when they release a bunch of innocent people from torture camps.

 

[mgb_phys]

We also do a war, on drugs - http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/friendlyfire/gopills.html

 

[jreelawg]

"One of the earliest uses of methamphetamine was during World War II when the German military dispensed it under the trade name Pervitin.[5] It was widely distributed across rank and division, from elite forces to tank crews and aircraft personnel. Chocolates dosed with methamphetamine were known as Fliegerschokolade ("flyer's chocolate") when given to pilots, or Panzerschokolade ("tanker's chocolate") when given to tank crews. From 1942 until his death in 1945, Adolf Hitler may have been given intravenous injections of methamphetamine by his personal physician Theodor Morell as a treatment for depression and fatigue. It is possible that it was used to treat Hitler's speculated Parkinson's disease, or that his Parkinson-like symptoms which developed from 1940 onwards were related to use of methamphetamine.[6]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methamphetamine

If you ever wondered how people could do such horrible things to people?

 

[tchitt]

Methamphetamine doesn't turn the masses into psychopaths... you've seen too many truth (lies) commercials.

 

[jreelawg]

Methamphetamine doesn't turn the masses into psychopaths... you've seen too many truth (lies) commercials.

I read the paper too much. It seams that most disturbing murders that have happened in my area have been committed by people high on meth. One case was of two underage kids who shot an old lady working at a store because she wouldn't sell them alcahol, they were on meth.
Another case of some kids who beat up a young child and then put em on the train tracks, they were on meth. Almost every day I read about someone who was high on meth that did something either disturbing, psychotic, or just plain stupid.

The masses in Germany were just told rosey stories from the propaganda in the news, and were clueless about the disturbing things happening behind the scenes. The people who were in the military got propaganda, plus meth, and threat of not following orders.

But really, what I think is the most notable point about meth and NAZI crimes is the link between the instigaters and the use of meth. Meth is known for causing extreme paranoia.
Most meth crimes are said to be related to a perceived threat which is exagerated by paranoia. NAZIS were on meth and led to believe that the Jews were a threat.

The real serious psychopaths were the people who were orchestrating the whole scene, from the propaganda, to the administering of drugs. They had a goal, and they had lies, drugs, and force as tools.

 

[tchitt]

You could achieve the same effect by dosing people with alcohol. Drugs reduce your good judgement drastically in general. You don't read "every day" about someone who was high on meth that did something disturbing, psychotic or stupid... you're either lying or your sources are lying.

How did they prove all these people were high on meth?

Yeah, meth can cause people to be aggressive... but it can also cause people to hug each other, clean their house, bite their fingernails, talk incessantly (this one is pretty universal.)

The fact is that the overwhelming majority people will do nothing psychotic or disturbing while on meth. They might do something stupid... but that's to be expected when you're ingesting chemicals.

Edit: Meth DOES cause amphetamine psychosis. All amphetamines do. This doesn't mean that they're suddenly okay with killing people... in fact someone suffering from amphetamine psychosis isn't in any condition to do much of anything. When a meth addict is awake for seven days he suffers from the effects of sleep deprivation (if you've ever stayed up for a day or two, you can testify to the fact that you start hearing things that aren't there and get a little scatter brained) and long term use of amphetamines seems to causes a temporary psychosis... but the nature of this doesn't really lend itself to violence necessarily. If every nazi in Auschwitz was crawling around on his hands and knees talking to his imaginary friends the jews probably would've been alright.

 

[tchitt]

But really, what I think is the most notable point about meth and NAZI crimes is the link between the instigaters and the use of meth. Meth is known for causing extreme paranoia.
Most meth crimes are said to be related to a perceived threat which is exagerated by paranoia. NAZIS were on meth and led to believe that the Jews were a threat.

I think this is a bit of a stretch. I'll grant you that stimulants cause outright paranoia... but some strung out idiot is more likely to have a knee-jerk reaction to his friend looking at him wrong and stabbing him rather than engaging in premeditated genocide. Drugs are a form of mind control, but to say that it's the way the nazis got their ranks to agree to their methods just sounds like more anti-drug propaganda to me.

 

[jreelawg]

You could achieve the same effect by dosing people with alcohol. Drugs reduce your good judgement drastically in general. You don't read "every day" about someone who was high on meth that did something disturbing, psychotic or stupid... you're either lying or your sources are lying.

How did they prove all these people were high on meth?

Yeah, meth can cause people to be aggressive... but it can also cause people to hug each other, clean their house, bite their fingernails, talk incessantly (this one is pretty universal.)

The fact is that the overwhelming majority people will do nothing psychotic or disturbing while on meth. They might do something stupid... but that's to be expected when you're ingesting chemicals.

Edit: Meth DOES cause amphetamine psychosis. All amphetamines do. This doesn't mean that they're suddenly okay with killing people... in fact someone suffering from amphetamine psychosis isn't in any condition to do much of anything. When a meth addict is awake for seven days he suffers from the effects of sleep deprivation (if you've ever stayed up for a day or two, you can testify to the fact that you start hearing things that aren't there and get a little scatter brained) and long term use of amphetamines seems to causes a temporary psychosis... but the nature of this doesn't really lend itself to violence necessarily. If every nazi in Auschwitz was crawling around on his hands and knees talking to his imaginary friends the jews probably would've been alright.

I do read of meth related crimes, but I guess I exagerated because the local paper isn't daily, but, the local newspaper has a section devoted specifically to meth crimes. Sometimes the crimes are more innocent, like people stealing things to feed their addiction, but often they are bizzar and violent.

Everyone has at one point felt compelled to do something violent, like say wanting to puch a jerk in nose. On meth, you might just do it without thinking, or maybe take it a step further, unable to clearly think about it and control your urge.

Your probably right that using meth isn't going to make you ok with killing people, but it will make you more prone to the head games that NAZI propaganda was dealing. It was a system, down to a science how to make people think and do as they wish. Meth was one of the ingredients in the formula.

If you read some of the effects of meth, illusions of Grandure (thinking you are a superior race), paranoia(thinking the jews are out to get you) etc. On alcahol, you aren't really paranoid.

 

[tchitt]

Have you ever done meth? I'm going to guess no.

Have you ever drank alcohol? I'm going to assume yes, because you said "it doesn't really make you paranoid."

If anything alcohol reduces paranoia, but that's beside the point. Now you're making arguments for your case using your past use of alcohol as evidence while making arguments against mine without having ever used meth yourself.

 

[tchitt]

Alcohol causes delusions of grandeur... maybe even more-so than meth. How many times have you seen someone start fights they couldn't win because they thought they were bullet proof? That's not the same thing as deciding that jews are racially inferior and engaging in genocide against them.

I'll grant you that Hitler's apparently rampant meth use did have a lot do with his own craziness. As we talk more I'm beginning to see your side a little more clearly... but at the same time Hitler had bigger problems than meth. Like growing up with an abusive father. His meth use was probably a result of his psychosis, not the other way around.

 

[jreelawg]

Alcohol causes delusions of grandeur... maybe even more-so than meth. How many times have you seen someone start fights they couldn't win because they thought they were bullet proof? That's not the same thing as deciding that jews are racially inferior and engaging in genocide against them.

I'll grant you that Hitler's apparently rampant meth use did have a lot do with his own craziness. As we talk more I'm beginning to see your side a little more clearly... but at the same time Hitler had bigger problems than meth. Like growing up with an abusive father. His meth use was probably a result of his psychosis, not the other way around.

I see your point as well, and I agree basically about what you say, I know a person who has been using meth for many years, and he is crazy, but also, one of the most peaceful people I know.

 

[BobG]

There is no doubt there are ample grounds for an investigation into some of the many allegations of war crimes committed by alliance members but in a world where the maxim of 'might is right' is paramount, it is is extremely unlikely any members of Bush's administration, and I'm thinking of Rumsfeld in particular here, will ever face justice which is unfortunate not only as it means criminal behaviour will go unpunished but also because these new lower standards will no doubt be seized upon by others to justify future breaches of the Conventions. Next time it could be US or British forces being tortured or massacred.

One suggestion (by Joe Klein) of a cagey way of dealing with the issue is for Obama to pardon Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Gonzalez, Tenet, et al for torturing detainees in the interest of sparing the nation the ordeal of having its national leaders tried for war crimes (very similar to Ford's pardon of Nixon).

It allows the US to acknowledge abuses with a somewhat ambiguous implied apology, permanently taints the administration that conducted the policy, and avoids war crimes trials in the US. (It might not give the pardonees free reign to travel the world, however).

 

[mgb_phys]

Methamphetamine doesn't turn the masses into psychopaths... you've seen too many truth (lies) commercials.

I'm not sure the problem is meth turning people into pysho kilers, it's just that arbitrarily doubling the dose during wartime and then giving the 'patient' a heavily armed supersonic fighter to play with might not be considered good judgement.

Of course if meth is optimal for raising performance levels in stressful circumstance perhaps it should be made compulsory for surgeons, civil airline pilots, police and anyone driving on the freeway.