This guy did, and his historical standing is reasonably good nonetheless.
Posted on 09/19/2006 7:38:57 PM PDT by bobsunshine
sure, its possible. but so long as the issue as to whether Geneva applies to terrorists is left to the recent SCOTUS decision, the cases and appeals will just keep coming and coming.
The spirit and intent of Article III is being abused. That much is clear.
We've made a lot of this trouble for ourselves. The Geneva Conventions assign no rights to people fighing out of uniform, except in one very limited case. Namely, when your country is invaded so fast, that the resistance comes together faster than they can decide on a color of headband to wear. That's literally the only case when it's okay to fight out of uniform.
Otherwise, terrorists could be executed on the spot, when captured. Unfortunately, the rules of engagement, as specified by the U.S. military, prohibit this. Then, once the AQ terrorists become prisoners, the courts and everyone else gets their hands on them. Lacking a clear category to put them in, they wind up in a sort of super POW status.
It's the worst of both worlds. It makes a mockery of Article III, which was designed to protect civilians by forcing combatants into uniform. It also makes a mockery of our justice system.
The best thing to do would be to execute any al-Qa'ida operating out of uniform when they are captured. Any fighting within uniform can be repatriated to their home country, where, in all likelihood, they'll get a long walk off of a short rope. To do otherwise is to deny innocent civilians the protections that the Geneva Conventions were supposed to provide.
Did you see that article by Andy McCarthy today that said that McCain's Detainee Treatment Act that passed last year...and that Bush signed, actually says that the military is supposed to read the MIRANDA RIGHTS to terrorists when the capture them???
I read this thread to see if anyone else remebered what Rush said today... and it only took 17 posts to find it.
Nothing more than another self inflicted wound in a long line of them. It's stuff like this that robs me of my sympathy for our side's legal troubles. We call it a war, but we treat it as a law enforcement issue. Then we get upset when other people want to treat it as a law enforcement issue.
I guess what we really need is some new Supreme Court Justices!
|
Justice Stevens was born in April 1920. GOP holds the Congress and you may see a 3rd Bush nominess confirmed by Jan 2009.
"Because Frist was on Hannity and made the point "they (Democrats and RINOS) don't have 60 votes." so they have to cave or get the blame for blocking anything being done. They are in an untendable political postion. So just like on the torture amendment, they will squeal and sqwauk and spin to turn anything into a victory when in fact the McCainiacs will have caved on everything but the PR spin."
I disagree. As long as McCain and Colin Powell provide cover, the Democrats have nothing to lose by keeping this GOP in-fighting on the front pages. Few Democrat or liberal-leaning independent voters are going to switch to GOP in November because they are angry at their representative for siding with McCain/Powell over Bush. In fact, moderate Dems can benefit themselves by "triangulating" with McCain/Powell in between Pelosi and Bush.
Frist has a long track record of going on tv and making false predictions about vote counts. Count on Frist to be out-maneuvered by Reid and McCain.
McCain has Graham, Warner, Collins, and no doubt he also has Snowe and Chafee. Probably Hagel as well. That's probably 50 votes including the Dems. I seriously doubt any Dem other than Ben Nelson will switch sides.
I'd suggest Phyllis Schafly's recent book "The Supremacists."
I'd like to see a conservative in the White House in 2009 and maybe get 2 or 3 new Justices.
AJ over at Strata-Sphere says McCain folded and the NYT is trying to give a fig-leaf to the Repubs from the Gang of 14. AJ is a smart guy so I feel pretty confident this is a win for Bush. I'll feel better if I hear Rush agree.
From your mouth to Gods ear.
The Treason Times is lying again. President Bush is on the high ground on this one.
Pray for W and Our Freedom Fighters
Fact of the matter is your assumptions about Frist are based on the nonsese screamed endlessly by Know Nothings like Mike Savage. Frist got the Judges approved without the Nuclear option. The Know Nothings are still pissed cause they were not intrested about the Judges they just wanted to have the long drawn out screaming match with the Leftists about it. Your doom and gloom pronouncements are merely based on your own feelings they do not have any base in fact.
I should have made it clear I meant that they don't or wouldn't apply it to OUR troops.
This guy did, and his historical standing is reasonably good nonetheless.
Someone has to explain this to me.
"redefining the obligations..." Huh???
What the heck is really going on please.
Just so. It's a complete distortion of the detailed wording of the Geneva Convention.
But it's also a complete distortion of the whole AIM AND PURPOSE of the convention. The aim and purpose is to agree to agree on both sides of a war to treat each others' POWs decently. You treat their prisoners decently so they will treat yours decently.
But if the other side deliberately tortures and murders all the prisoners they take, then obviously the treaty serves no useful purpose. In fact, it's the same situation you meet every time you deal with these beasts. They only understand and admire force. They don't understand kindness, they don't understand human decency, they don't understand keeping your sworn word to an enemy, they don't see negotiations as anything but a convenient means to delay their enemies and get what they want.
They only understand force.
Which is not to say that we should also become beasts and torture POWs. But it is to say that the convention obviously doesn't apply to such a situation, never mind the details, although those are also very clear. So we have a perfect right to do anything our consciences and laws will permit, and that includes questioning that may save allied lives and lead toward a victory in this nasty war.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.