Replies

"The law and treaty that governs what we can do is the Geneva Convention, which states *clearly* that enemy combatants who are not wearing a legally *recognized* military uniform or carrying military ID (dog tags) can be shot on sight or otherwise dealt with by the capturing Party."

Please cite chapter and verse to support that outrageous claim. If the Geneva Convention(s) are that "clear" on this matter, this should be quite simple for you to do.

The fact is, the Geneva Convention(s) state no such thing. The best that can be said about the GC, is that it is silent as to the permitted dispositions for illegal enemy combatants. It is clear from your claim that either you haven't actually bothered to read the GC's, or else you've chosen to intentionally misrepresent them.

When you post something that clearly in error, it makes the rest of your arguments suspect, as well. And that is a shame, because other than your imprudent claim about the GC, you and I are in (general) agreement.

--Boot Hill

"...you and I are in (general) agreement."

Oops, strike that. I just read your goofy claim that treaties can overrule the Constitution. We are no longer "in general agreement".

--Boot Hill

"The best that can be said about the GC, is that it is silent as to the permitted dispositions for illegal enemy combatants. It is clear from your claim that either you haven't actually bothered to read the GC's, or else you've chosen to intentionally misrepresent them."

No, enemy combatants captured under various circumstances can be tried by military tribunals or given summary executions on the battlefield if they are "unlawful combatants" under the 1949 Geneva Conventions.

The Geneva Conventions define and protects *lawful* combatants. Once the Geneva Conventions place someone under the *UNlawful* combatant catagory, they are then subject to "The Law of War" (among others).