Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: steve-b
No, There is a difference between uniformed soldiers who represent a nation and battlefield combatants who are hired killers for terrorist organizations
232 posted on 07/07/2003 6:51:25 AM PDT by MJY1288 (He Who Believes Freedom Isn't For All, Is Working For The Devil)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 219 | View Replies ]


To: MJY1288
There is a difference between uniformed soldiers who represent a nation and battlefield combatants who are hired killers for terrorist organizations

The Geneva Convention rules defining "soldiers", "partisans", etc (and thereby defining those who fight outside any of the above catagories as an "illegal combatant" are rather more extensive than that). The fact that al-Qaeda thugs wear no uniform is one of their violations, but far from the only one.

Under international law, the perps of the Malmedy Massacre were entitled to no process of law beyond "yep, we've proven beyond reasonable doubt that they're SS, all right -- hang 'em high". The US went well beyond that, and McCarthy's defense of the Malmedy perps thus has no rule-of-law justification.

244 posted on 07/07/2003 9:56:17 AM PDT by steve-b
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 232 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson