Obama Orders Gitmo To Close

[Saint Therese]

The conventions only protects combatants in uniform. Also, all combatants according to the Geneva Conventions are members of military of governments, which terrorists are not.
Perhaps YOU should do some research.

[kujo]

Letter of the law VS spirit of the law

[Saint Therese]

In WW2 non uniformed combatants were executed.

[Winchester]

[quote name='fidei defensor' post='1758935' date='Jan 22 2009, 10:22 PM']This nation is governed by rule of law. Just because your emotions run high and you feel angry about what these people did (or could do) doesn't mean you get to throw the law out the window and do as you please. That's exactly why the prison is being closed and exactly why it was the right thing to do.[/quote]
Mine is practicality. They are soldiers more than criminals and they are not citizens. You've created a straw man--I've not advocated anarchy. I have made the point that these are neither citizens nor mere criminals. Thus they should not be treated the same as other criminals.

[philothea]

[quote name='Saint Therese' post='1758970' date='Jan 22 2009, 11:04 PM']The conventions only protects combatants in uniform. Also, all combatants according to the Geneva Conventions are members of military of governments, which terrorists are not.
Perhaps YOU should do some research.[/quote]


The Geneva Conventions are primarily concerned with non-combatants and prisoners of war, but address many international issues and humanitarian concerns.

In any case, the International Committee of the Red Cross is in charge of determining Convention violations, which they've have said have been going on in Guantanamo Bay.

[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_detention_camp"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_detention_camp[/url]

[quote]The International Committee of the Red Cross has stated that, "Every person in enemy hands must have some status under international law: he is either a prisoner of war and, as such, covered by the Third Convention, a civilian covered by the Fourth Convention, [or] a member of the medical personnel of the armed forces who is covered by the First Convention. There is no intermediate status; nobody in enemy hands can fall outside the law." Thus, if the detainees are not classified as prisoners of war, this would still grant them the rights of the Fourth Geneva Convention as opposed to the more common Third Geneva Convention which deals exclusively with prisoners of war.[/quote]

(edit for typos)

Edited January 23, 2009 by philothea

[CatholicCid]

[quote name='kujo' post='1758952' date='Jan 22 2009, 11:42 PM']Prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law, either here or in their countries of origin.[/quote]

#1 was the one's that we were not likely to try and were not welcome in their home country.

[Saint Therese]

I didn't realize that we were bound to follow guidelines of the Red Cross, as opposed to following American law.

[philothea]

[quote name='Saint Therese' post='1759033' date='Jan 23 2009, 12:35 AM']I didn't realize that we were bound to follow guidelines of the Red Cross, as opposed to following American law.[/quote]
The Red Cross looks for violations because they're the only ones allowed in to places. That's like saying people have to follow the "guidelines of the FBI" instead of federal law. They're investigators in this instance, not lawmakers.

The United States of America is one of the leading signatories of the Geneva Accords. The treatment and detention of people by the USA in Guantanamo Bay has been in consistent, flagrant violation of the treaties we agreed to.

You asked what rule of law was being violated; I answered.

[CatherineM]

[quote name='Saint Therese' post='1759033' date='Jan 22 2009, 11:35 PM']I didn't realize that we were bound to follow guidelines of the Red Cross, as opposed to following American law.[/quote]

Depends on how you want the US to be viewed by the rest of the folks we share the planet with. We can be the big bully who uses a disproportionate amount of resources, and tells everyone else how to act without doing so ourselves. Or, we can be viewed as just, compassionate, and practicing what we preach.

I awoke to the sound of my father screaming in his sleep, what little he got, several times a week growing up. His screams were reliving violations of the Geneva Convention committed against him. Why would any American, let alone any Catholic, want to be approving of activities that we long ago decided weren't and shouldn't be a part of our civilized behavior. Yes, I know that some of these men were involved in atrocities against our people. We don't need to become them. We're supposed to be better than that.

[Saint Therese]

Frankly I don't care how the U.S is viewed abroad. Why should I care about the opinions of people who can't even run their own countries?

[philothea]

[quote name='Saint Therese' post='1759060' date='Jan 23 2009, 01:10 AM']Frankly I don't care how the U.S is viewed abroad. Why should I care about the opinions of people who can't even run their own countries?[/quote]
How about how the U.S. is viewed by God?

[Saint Therese]

What about it?

Edited January 23, 2009 by Saint Therese

[kujo]

[quote name='Saint Therese' post='1759060' date='Jan 23 2009, 02:10 AM']Frankly I don't care how the U.S is viewed abroad. Why should I care about the opinions of people who can't even run their own countries?[/quote]

Even though we are only an hour and a half into this brand new day, I'm willing to bet that this will be one of the most ignorant comments made on Phatmass today.

Edited January 23, 2009 by kujo

[Saint Therese]

I can't think of anything more ridiculous that basing our gov't policies on the opinion of foreign nations.

[kujo]

[quote name='Saint Therese' post='1759076' date='Jan 23 2009, 02:36 AM']I can't think of anything more ridiculous that basing our gov't policies on the opinion of foreign nations.[/quote]

No one is saying that we should "base" our government policies on the opinions of foreign nations. But we should be mindful of the effects our policies have on other countries and how we are perceived abroad. In this day in age, it is vital that we avoid unilateralism as often as possible, instead leaning on multilateralism and building consensuses whenever possible. Furthermore, we ought to look at coalition efforts as a means towards conserving the amount of money and manpower we must put forth in a given scenario.

To go at it alone would yield similar results to the blunder of the War in Iraq.