Geneva Convention applies to insurgents? 36 replies

Please wait...

NiteStryker

Biggest F-ing A-hole 2010

215,560 XP

24th April 2003

0 Uploads

18,771 Posts

0 Threads

#1 14 years ago

Do you think the laws of the Geneva Convention should have application to the insurgents in Iraq?

I dont.

The G-C applies to uniformed combatants, and these insurgents are not in uniform. Also, I say if they wont follow it, why should we? Screw decency, screw ethics, I say do whatever it takes to stop them.

Insurgents capture and behead hostages, and then they capture a women who has only helped Iraq for 30 years, and shoot her in the head. I say that these people are not prisioners of war and should not be treated as such. They do not deserve asylum when we capture them, and I think that methods of tourture would be fine against these islamic facsiests.

I know many of you will be angry by my comments, call me inhumane and such, but look at the actions of the people we are fighting. If they wont follow the 'rules of war', why should the United States?




Aeroflot

I would die without GF

169,400 XP

2nd May 2003

0 Uploads

15,205 Posts

0 Threads

#2 14 years ago

The USA must follow the rules to set an example and we are looked up to by the other nations. If we are found breaking the rules of the Geneva Convention, then we would be harrassed by the other nations.




Scientist Dr. Professor

The Old Man

50 XP

4th September 2004

0 Uploads

22,336 Posts

0 Threads

#3 14 years ago

A combatant (also referred to as an enemy combatant) is a soldier or guerrilla member who is waging war. Under the Geneva Conventions, persons waging war must have the following four characteristics to be protected by the laws of war:

  1. In uniform: Wear distinctive clothing making them recognizable as soldiers from a distance.
  2. Openly bearing arms: Carrying guns or small arms and not concealing them.
  3. Under officers: Obedient to a chain of command ending in a political leader or government.
  4. Fighting according to the laws of war: Not committing atrocities or crimes, not deliberately attacking civilians or engaging in terrorism.

A combatant who has surrendered or been captured becomes a prisoner of war.

A captured person not wearing a uniform who is caught carrying weapons or engaging in warlike acts (such as a spy) is not a lawful combatant and is therefore not protected by the laws of war. Such persons should be treated according to applicable civilian laws (if any). In practice they may be tortured or executed.

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

I guess the insurgents are not protected under the Geneva Convention.




NiteStryker

Biggest F-ing A-hole 2010

215,560 XP

24th April 2003

0 Uploads

18,771 Posts

0 Threads

#4 14 years ago

pathfinderThe USA must follow the rules to set an example and we are looked up to by the other nations. If we are found breaking the rules of the Geneva Convention, then we would be harrassed by the other nations.[/QUOTE]

So why wont all nations speak out against the terrorists who are faking their own deaths (a violation of the G-C, BTW)

[QUOTE=Seinfield]I guess the insurgents are not protected under the Geneva Convention.

So why are we giving them protection?




Aeroflot

I would die without GF

169,400 XP

2nd May 2003

0 Uploads

15,205 Posts

0 Threads

#5 14 years ago

NiteStrykerSo why wont all nations speak out against the terrorists who are faking their own deaths (a violation of the G-C, BTW)

So why are we giving them protection?

Nations ARE speaking out against terrorists!

Why do you think we still have multinational forces in Iraq and Afgahnistan?




NiteStryker

Biggest F-ing A-hole 2010

215,560 XP

24th April 2003

0 Uploads

18,771 Posts

0 Threads

#6 14 years ago

Im not talking about speaking out against terrorists, im talking about the way the terrorists are violating geneva conventions and yet expect the US to treat them as if they were uniformed soldiers...




yod@

I'm way cooler than n0e (who isn't though?)

50 XP

14th April 2004

0 Uploads

4,898 Posts

0 Threads

#7 14 years ago

so, its the uniform that gets g-c not the man ,lol




Aeroflot

I would die without GF

169,400 XP

2nd May 2003

0 Uploads

15,205 Posts

0 Threads

#8 14 years ago
NiteStrykerIm not talking about speaking out against terrorists, im talking about the way the terrorists are violating geneva conventions and yet expect the US to treat them as if they were uniformed soldiers...

What I said before, we must live up to the expectations of the Geneva Convention, or be critisized.




Admiral Donutz VIP Member

Wanna go Double Dutch?

735,271 XP

9th December 2003

0 Uploads

71,460 Posts

0 Threads

#9 14 years ago

Well i guess that they don't have to, that is no reason to shoot them while they are unarmed though. Anyform of unnecessary violance is bad, even angainst resistance figheters or even terrorists. They are animals yet we have to treat them as humanly as possible. I agree that the geneva convension doesn't apply to them but it doesn't justify (IMO) unnecessary violance.




ScOrPY VIP Member

Advanced Member

50 XP

17th November 2003

0 Uploads

15,582 Posts

0 Threads

#10 14 years ago

From seeing what these insurgents do to people such as those who are helping out the Iraqi citizens, I don't see why they should have any rights.