Originally Posted by klinefan
The Geneva convention doesn't apply to terrorists at all. They never signed it and they aren't in uniform as they're supposed to be. Spies in WWII were summarily shot for that reason. Some of them anyway.
YOu don't know what Petreus was referring to...he may have been referring to a few isolated incidents involving Iraqi millitary soldiers.
Anyway, they're treated pretty well at Gitmo. The average one has gained something like 20 pounds. I can't figure out why they want to close it down and move them into max. security installations. They get a lot more fresh air at Gitmo than they would in 23 hour a day lockdown.
But it's all symbolism to liberals. Close down Gitmo! And move them to a place that's far worse but doesn't have teh "gitmo" name on it. Idiotic.
Anyway, how many guy were waterboarded? 3?
he was REFERING TO members of the Iraqi ARMY!
this is part of the dirty little secret, the VP approved of waterboarding of Iraqi army soldiers in custody to create links from Hussein to Bin Laden...
again.....the name of a specific member of that MILITARY is Ibn al-Shaykh [al-Libi]
he was murdered in Egypt.
I understand the logic in the assumption that 'terrorists' arent part of an army or nation....and thus don't fall inot a military category. I GET IT.
We could've done a few different things here. We could've petitioned the UN post 9-11, and categorized a terrorist as a differnt kind of animal. Set forth a few principals of these said EITs and had nations sign off on it. We did nothing of the sort. We relied on a handful of lawyers, and one judge. and most of this evidence of authorization seems to come after the fact.
I guess you need to ask yourself this:
"If this was so legal, why did they draft the authorization of this, why theneed to justify the legality of something that was legal?"
"Why did Lindy England to Jail?