Disturbing allegations from Army Times -- homicides

[InformedSource]

http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-2903288.php

"From the moment they are captured, prisoners are hooded, shackled and isolated. The message to the troops: Anything goes. In addition to the scores of prisoners who were humiliated and demeaned, at least 14 have died in custody in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Army has ruled at least two of those homicides."

[Rick Myers]

1. That's a "Holy Sh*t" Article!!!

The Army Times???

Wow...

"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here, this is The War Room!"

:grr:

[patrick g]

2. here's my .02

that's no good...but i almost expected it. a little off topic here...i heard that over 25 soldiers have committed suicide over the last year in/around iraq. not sure of the legitemacy, haven't found any news articles of it . . ..

[pansypoo53219]

3. enemy combatants are

'different'. they are not prisoners of war.
no. 9/11 did nopt change everything. george is still a bullying rat bastard spawned from a succabus.

[DieboldMustDie]

4. "Enemy combatant" is a concept that does not exist in international law.

I'm sorry, I can't remember exactly who said this, but it was someone on O'Franken this (Tuesday) afternoon. Can someone else who heard this help out here?

It seems that anyone captured should either be treated as a POW, with rights under the 3^rd Geneva Convention, or as civilians, with rights under the 4^th. See http://www.genevaconventions.org for more details.

[DavidMS]

5. There is a catagory that is not covered by the geneva convention

2. Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions:

People who fail to do any of the following:

(a) That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;

(b) That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;

(c) That of carrying arms openly;

(d) That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.

http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/91.htm

So if those 5 islamists who murdered Nick Berg get caught, the geneva convention does not apply (in my reading of the convention). Being that they are not conducting their opperations in acordance with the laws of war. According to my reading of the text, leaving them alone with Anthrax Annie would not violate the Geneva Convention. Is this correct?

[muriel_volestrangler]

6. They may not be covered explicitly by the Geneva Convention

but that doesn't put them outside the law of the land they're in. As you say, they're murderers, and so ought to be tried for murder. I doubt that any previous Iraqi constitution permits torture of suspects.

The idea of those Geneva Convention rules is to classify resistance movements with regular armies - ie they can be shot on sight if they're recognisable as militia etc. and haven't surrendered, but they must be treated as POWs once they have.