The purpose of the Geneva Convention was SPECIFICALLY to discourage terrorism and the kind of fighting we see the "insurgents" engage in now, by REWARDING nations, militias and other organized groups for abiding by the rules of war. The reward was fair treatment for those who might be captured and repatriation at the conclusion of the conflict. The GC was intended to protect civilians by making it disadvantageous to use civilians as human shields or civilian structures such as hospitals, schools and religious buildings to shield or conceal weapons and men.
For that reason "insurgents and terrorists" - those without a responsible chain of command, those using civilian dress to hide their status as combatants, those who countries will not cliam responsibility for - they are deliberately and rightfully excluded from the protections of the GC. There are no accomodations made for unlawful combatants because the unlawful combatant was the whole problem the GC was intended to correct from the very beginning.
To treat terrorists and other unlawful combatants as if they are the same as lawful combatants is to blur the distinction and defeat the entire purpose of the GC. No good can come from blurring this distinction, no good from elevating the terroist to the status of soldier or from demoting the soldier to the level of a terrorist. It will only further endanger civilians.
Unlawful combatants are what is referred to in the Law of Nations- not international law but a code which precedes it and one on which our law also rests- as bandits and pirates. These were to be hung, not to be kept unharmed and repatriated as a soldier should be. Unlawful combatants must be treated as outlaws and NEVER as well as soldiers; they must be severely and harshly treated so as to discourage that method of warfare which uses civilians as shields.
Funny how the press ignores the fact the "insurgents" were war criminals because they were not wearing uniforms or insignia to distinguish themselves from civilians, have been hiding arms instead of carrying them openly at all times, and have no responsible chain of command to take charge of them in battle or in defeat, to investigate or discipline them when they violate the rules of war, or provide ID and contact information for their families should they be captured. Not to mention they were violating another GC biggie by taking up positions in the mosque, etc.
Not that the insurgents were evera party to the GC to begin with.
Ayad Allawi repeated calls them criminals. The GC talks about how you can deal with them too. You can shoot looters. You can lock people up. There are guidelines. You can't torture them for example.
The problem is though that these criminals almost seem like normal combatants. The IRA had serial numbers, Britain treated them to some extent like POWs. They were released after the conflict. This might be a good model.
"To treat terrorists and other unlawful combatants as if they are the same as lawful combatants is to blur the distinction and defeat the entire purpose of the GC. No good can come from blurring this distinction, no good from elevating the terroist to the status of soldier or from demoting the soldier to the level of a terrorist. It will only further endanger civilians."
Very well stated! It's also time to get these imbedded reporters out of the way of our troops! Our guys have a difficult enough time doing their job without having to put up with this garbage. If you are a terrorist and shooting at our troops, you are fair game and NOT a legal combatant!