POWs Geneva Convention

  • News
  • Thread starter Adam
  • Start date
  • #1
Adam
42
1
I just saw Donald Rumsfeld on TV, complaining about the way Iraq treats the American soldiers it has captured, sating it is against the Geneva Convention on POWs to put them on TV. Personally I think his real problem is the demoralisation of US troops from such things. But the important point is: Why bring up the Geneva Convention now, if he was ignoraing it completely for Afghanistan? Remember those guys sitting in Cuba? Pot calling the kettle black, eh? Hypocrisy, anyone?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Answers and Replies

  • #2
Yeah, the irony is classic. Not to mention that US television has been broadcasting film of Iraqi prisoners...
 
  • #3
18,840
9,018
Saddam is now giving anyone a 17k reward for any G.I. head. Real nice!
 
  • #4
Adam
42
1
http://www.ipsystems.com/powmia/lzfeedback/johnson.html [Broken]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #5
On the news tonight a Philipene woman in Mexico who subscribes to a philipeno tv station saw her son as one of the prisoners of war that the iraq's captured and had on their television.
 
  • #7
"Saddam is now giving anyone a 17k reward for any G.I. head. Real nice!"

And 2x that for live prisoners. That's why they look so happy. BTW Russia supplied Iraq with night vision goggles & other equipment in February.
 
  • #8
Laser Eyes
73
0
I am sure Iraq will treat POWs as well as the US is treating Khalid Sheik Mohammed.
 
  • #9
Njorl
Science Advisor
285
17
Originally posted by Laser Eyes
I am sure Iraq will treat POWs as well as the US is treating Khalid Sheik Mohammed.

They should certainly be treated much better. Khalid Sheik Mohammad is accused of being a terrorist. He was captured in a country which he entered illegally. He is not protected by any treaty other than international human rights treaties. The American POW's are protected by the Geneva convention.

Many Iraqi soldiers seem to be trying to lose their protection under the Geneva Convention. They are engaging in combat while out of uniform and attacking while under a flag of surrender. These actions subject them to all sorts of harsh treatment. It is clear they are trying to coax Americans into shooting at civilians or genuinely surrendering soldiers.

Njorl
 
  • #10
heumpje
36
0
Originally posted by Njorl
They should certainly be treated much better.
No offence intended but while reading your post I had to think of the following:

Khalid Sheik Mohammad is accused of being a terrorist.
So is Bush and so are American soldiers...

He was captured in a country which he entered illegally.
Uhhmmmm... Same here for your soldiers

He is not protected by any treaty other than international human rights treaties. The American POW's are protected by the Geneva convention.
Njorl
I'm not sure wether there is a major differnece between the two. They generally state that you should treat people with at least a little bit of respect. They also state that it isn't allowed to torture etc.
 
  • #11
Njorl
Science Advisor
285
17
Heumpje,
You have arbitrarily decided that there is no difference between war and terrorism. The vast majority of the governments of the world disagree with you.
Njorl
 
  • #12
Laser Eyes
73
0
You have arbitrarily decided that there is no difference between war and terrorism. The vast majority of the governments of the world disagree with you.
Njorl

War is simply terrorism on a larger scale.
 
  • #13
The problem for me is the idea that some people have more right to humane treatment than others.
 
  • #14
no kidding, for some odd reason it seems that many believe the idea of "all men are created equal" only applies to the point of creation and looses value after that.
 
  • #15
Originally posted by kyleb
no kidding, for some odd reason it seems that many believe the idea of "all men are created equal" only applies to the point of creation and looses value after that.

Debating whether someone is a POW or not, and suggesting that we can treat everyone else in an inhumane way, is a betrayal of American ideals.
 
  • #16
Njorl
Science Advisor
285
17
I never suggested that Khalid Sheik Mohammed should be treated inhumanely. I simply stated that POW's have more rights than common crimminals. Do you think they shouldn't?

Besides, he is a prisoner of Pakistani intelligence, not the US. Of course, that is cause for concern. Pakistani intelligence is dominated by Muslim fundementalists, and they are notorious human rights abusers.

Njorl
 
  • #17
Originally posted by Njorl
I never suggested that Khalid Sheik Mohammed should be treated inhumanely. I simply stated that POW's have more rights than common crimminals. Do you think they shouldn't?

Besides, he is a prisoner of Pakistani intelligence, not the US. Of course, that is cause for concern. Pakistani intelligence is dominated by Muslim fundementalists, and they are notorious human rights abusers.

Njorl
Good point about Pakistan...but there was(and is) much talk about turning prisoners over to less 'squeamish' countries to do teh torturing for America.
 
  • #18
russ_watters
Mentor
21,950
8,984
Why bring up the Geneva Convention now, if he was ignoraing it completely for Afghanistan? Remember those guys sitting in Cuba? Pot calling the kettle black, eh? Hypocrisy, anyone?
Huh? The men in Cuba are prisoners of war. They are being treated in accordance with the Geneva convention. And I don't recall us shooting any of them in the head.
Yeah, the irony is classic. Not to mention that US television has been broadcasting film of Iraqi prisoners...
That is misleading. The US is *NOT* broadcasting interrogations.

Kyle and Adam, 30 and 50 year old stores? Please. One has no source info - in fact it appears to be a personal website. The other, omg...
Put in charge of one compound, Major Bancroft discovered mail had not been delivered to prisoners for four months. "It became evident that US officers and soldiers ... thought the Chinese and Korean prisoners were oriental cattle who were to be given different treatment to a European." In one case, he saw a prisoners' representative addressed as "You slant-eyed, yellow bastard."
Iraq is shooting POW's in the head and you are worried about North Korean POW's from 50 years ago not getting regular MAIL and being called NAMES!?? What kind of MONSTER are you?
I am sure Iraq will treat POWs as well as the US is treating Khalid Sheik Mohammed.
Is he dead yet? If not, he's got one up on MOST of the Americans Iraq captured.
War is simply terrorism on a larger scale.
Simply wrong. At least look it up in the dictionary.
 
  • #19
you call me a monster for pointing out the inhuman acts committed by our military in the hopes it might sway people from condoning war? i don't think i want to know what you would consider good.
 
  • #20
Laser Eyes
73
0
Besides, he is a prisoner of Pakistani intelligence, not the US. Of course, that is cause for concern. Pakistani intelligence is dominated by Muslim fundementalists, and they are notorious human rights abusers.

No he is a prisoner of the CIA at the US airbase in Kabul where he is being tortured by the country that does not commit torture.
 
  • #21
russ_watters
Mentor
21,950
8,984
you call me a monster for pointing out the inhuman acts committed by our military in the hopes it might sway people from condoning war? i don't think i want to know what you would consider good
No, I call you a monster for insinuating that the torture and murder of americans is equivalent to us calling other countries' pows names and not giving them mail. At least apply your standards equally. Of course that's the whole problem though - the US is held to a HIGHER standard than the rest of the world and though we generally meet it, there is no such thing as perfect.

What I consider good is America's following the Geneva convention. What I consider bad is Iraq's breaking of pretty much every protocol. I'll go further to say historically (in the past 100 years anyway) the US is MILES above our enemies morally when it comes to the treatment of POW's.

Kyleb, you seriously made me nauseous when I first read that.
 
Last edited:
  • #22
nauseous? that is what happens to sick people.
 
  • #23
Grow up Kyle.
 
  • #24
you call me a monster for pointing out the inhuman acts committed by our military in the hopes it might sway people from condoning war? i don't think i want to know what you would consider good.

That is pitiful. How about the sick ungrateful acts of people like you! Why don't you go live with saddam! He has a nice 2 by 4 you can sleep on in his damned bunker!
 
  • #25
russ -- I was watching CNN when one of the embedded reporters was filming some of the Iraqi prisoners! The anchor even mentioned "by the way, showing video of POWs might be construed to be against the Geneva Convention" beforehand. Granted, it is the US media doing this; there was no evidence of active govt participation as with the American POWs.

Also, human rights organizations -- the Red Cross, Amnesty International -- have been roundly critiquing US violations of the Geneva conventions ever since the War on Terror started. We've "rendered" (lovely word, no?) people to countries like Pakistan, which are known to torture their prisoners... that's not only disgusting in and of itself, but a violation of the Convention. We keep Taliban prisoners indefinitely at Guantanamo, refusing to repatriate or identify them... another violation. Both of these are IMO somewhat more important provisions than asking a few questions on film. The adminstration's claim is that Taliban are not POWs hence Geneva is not applicable... but they refuse to allow an 'independent tribunal' to verify this, also required by Geneva.

Pointing these things out isn't pro-Saddam or anti-American; we just want to keep the USA in the right place. It honestly makes me ill and angry to think that my country is handing over people for torture.
 
  • #26
gah damgo, you sick, ungrateful, person! Why don't you go live with saddam!


:wink:


seriously though Nicool003, considering your mentality i would have to say you would make a better bunk-mate for ruthless dictator.
 
  • #27
russ_watters
Mentor
21,950
8,984
russ -- I was watching CNN when one of the embedded reporters was filming some of the Iraqi prisoners!
Yes, damgo, I'm aware of that and I did not and do not deny it. Quite frankly, I don't know how that works. Maybe its a grey area in the Geneva convention - I don't think they anticipated the level of media coverage in war. In any case, the reason for that part of the Geneva convention was to avoid humiliation of the POWs. There is a huge difference between what CNN shows and what Iraqi TV shows. In fact, I'd go so far as to say CNN's coverage HELPS in the enforcement of the Geneva convention.

Also, human rights organizations -- the Red Cross, Amnesty International -- have been roundly critiquing US violations of the Geneva conventions ever since the War on Terror started.
Yes, I know. I think they are wrong. Here's why:
We've "rendered" (lovely word, no?) people to countries like Pakistan, which are known to torture their prisoners... that's not only disgusting in and of itself, but a violation of the Convention
How is that different from an ordinary extradition?
We keep Taliban prisoners indefinitely at Guantanamo, refusing to repatriate or identify them... another violation.
Those POWs are/were combatants in an ONGOING war. When it is safe (for US) to deport them, we will.
Both of these are IMO somewhat more important provisions than asking a few questions on film.
Debateable, but reasonable.
The adminstration's claim is that Taliban are not POWs hence Geneva is not applicable... but they refuse to allow an 'independent tribunal' to verify this, also required by Geneva.
Tough one - but has any country ever done such a thing? I don't tend to think that's a reasonable thing to expect a country to do.
Pointing these things out isn't pro-Saddam or anti-American; we just want to keep the USA in the right place. It honestly makes me ill and angry to think that my country is handing over people for torture.
That is perfectly reasonable - even patriotic.

gah damgo, you sick, ungrateful, person! Why don't you go live with saddam
Kyleb, you could learn a thing or two from damgo on presenting a mature, reasonable, lucid arguement. You've decended into a name-calling loop. As I think damgo and I proved, reasonable people can disagree without resorting to personal attacks.
 
  • #28
that was sarcasim russ, maybe you missed the ":wink:" and the post from Nicool003 right before it that i was spoofing?
 
  • #29
russ_watters
Mentor
21,950
8,984
No, kyle, I didn't miss the sarcasm, you missed the point. My point was that you'd do better to use mature, reasonable, logical, and lucid arguements than namecalling, sarcasm, false logic, and misleading arguements.
 
  • #30
Njorl
Science Advisor
285
17
Originally posted by Laser Eyes
No he is a prisoner of the CIA at the US airbase in Kabul where he is being tortured by the country that does not commit torture.
I checked, and you are right about the custody. He was held by Pakistan for three days and handed over. I did not see the hand-over on the news. However, what makes you say he is being tortured? As far as I can tell, there is absolutely no information about him available, only a lot of supposition.

All of that is obscuring the point I made though. He is not deserving of the same rights as a POW, Iraqi or American. He is certainly deserving of the fundamental human rights that even convicted criminals deserve - more, since he has been convicted of nothing as of yet. But a POW is entitled to more than these basic rights.

Njorl
 
  • #31
That is pitiful. How about the sick ungrateful acts of people like you! Why don't you go live with saddam! He has a nice 2 by 4 you can sleep on in his damned bunker!

That was meant for you Kyleb and you know it.

gah damgo, you sick, ungrateful, person! Why don't you go live with saddam!
How pitiful are you going to get? Damgo I hope you don't listen to the likes of him.
 
  • #32
russ_watters, i didnt have an arument with damgo; i was supporting his opinion with a little sarcasim. Nicool003, it would be nice if you would realize that as well.
 
  • #33
Laser Eyes
73
0
Originally posted by Njorl
I checked, and you are right about the custody. He was held by Pakistan for three days and handed over. I did not see the hand-over on the news. However, what makes you say he is being tortured? As far as I can tell, there is absolutely no information about him available, only a lot of supposition.
Njorl

When he was captured there were some statements by US intelligence officials that there was a pre-9/11 policy and a post-9/11 policy on interrogating prisoners. They said the same rules no longer applied. I remember one official said that after 9/11 the gloves came off.
 
  • #34
russ_watters
Mentor
21,950
8,984
russ_watters, i didnt have an arument with damgo; i was supporting his opinion with a little sarcasim. Nicool003, it would be nice if you would realize that as well.
Ok, this is kinda a personal attack (hypocritical, I know), but I'm a little frustrated. Kyle, you missed the point AGAIN. You're kinda dense. My point was that you should structure your arguements the way damgo does IN GENERAL. Your OVERALL tactics are poor.
 
  • #35
russ--
There is quite a difference between extradition and the recent rendering over of suspects. An extradition is a formal legal proceeding: eg, first, say, Pakistan announces that person X is accused of committing crime Y. The USA would then take person Y into custody and ship them off to Pakistan, where they would face legal proceedings.

What's actually happening is the CIA/US military/etc takes some prisoners, decides they need more "persuasion" obtaining information from some of them, and hands them over to Pakistani (or other) intelligence. These people are not identified, and no accusations are made.

That is the main thing I (and human rights organizations) object to. I don't have any problem with locking up terrorists; I object to letting the CIA or Dubya secretly detain or "render" people they might suspect of terrorism. Of course there is no way for anyone else to verify that suspected terrorist activities are even the reason for these people's detainment: we are left with the Administration's word on the matter.

This kind of secretive, permanent "disappearance" of suspects is a hallmark of repressive dictatorships. I expect to see it in El Salvador, Iraq, Zimbabwe; not the USA.
 

Suggested for: POWs Geneva Convention

Replies
32
Views
388
  • Last Post
Replies
17
Views
525
  • Last Post
3
Replies
104
Views
6K
Replies
14
Views
451
Replies
2
Views
253
  • Last Post
3
Replies
73
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
5
Views
744
  • Last Post
Replies
5
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
588
Top