terrorists 'rights'?

sorry if this was discussed before, but, legally, [ from UN/Geneva ] do terrorists-like the Paris animals-have rights like the soldiers of WW2?? ...I would think not....here in the US, they talk about the rights [ for trial/prison length/etc ] of the Gitmo prisoners....I would say they can hold them indefinitely, just as POWs in WW2, even if no war has been declared, this is a 'different' kind of war...so I would think there are not too many ''legal'' rules made...

 

Considering they are not fighters from a recognized government, you have your answer .

 

They have declared war. These various groups have declared war on the west in general and individual nations specifically through Fatwa and through declaration of Jihad. It is our idiotic governments who refuse to recognize that as war.

I've long said we ought to recognize each group as "enemy combatants" and lock them up until their group signs a formal declaration of peace with our own governments. That is never going to happen, so we could just lock them up for life and forget about them. Those who are accused of war crimes (killing of civilians) would be tried by military tribunal and executed. This is entirely in accord with the Geneva and Hague conventions.

 

They all variously claim to represent the "caliphate" or other greater spheres, so recognize them as insurgents. They become "enemy combatants" not prisoners of war, and their treatment is defined under international convention. Lock them up. Forever.

 

that's the term<>enemy combatants, ty Kody....are they discussed in any rules of war??they wear no uniform, target innocent civilians, etc...?

 

Shoot them and the problem is solved .

 

sorry Kody, I see the answer in your previous post....I would think they have no rights-enemy combatants-since they wear no uniform, target civilians/etc....although they are not like a 'spy', I would think you could do whatever you want with them [torture/execute ], because, what country would argue against it?

 

yes, that's why it seems complicated/difficult to battle them.....they come from many areas,?

 

that's what the Israelis did/do to Black September...

 

Lobotomise any who claim allegiance to a terrorist organisation. Parade the walking dead regularly...

 

In real life you have to hang your hat on some aspect of international law. "Enemy combatants" are a recognized status under the Hague and Geneva conventions. Look at some of the Partisan groups in WWII, some were under the aegis of governments and some weren't. For example, some of the French communist groups were not representing the French government-in-exile, but we still demanded they receive treatment as "enemy combatants" when captured by the Germans. The Germans chose to ignore this and those Germans found themselves on trial after the war.

There is plenty of precedent for locking up "enemy combatants" whether they represent a formal government or not. And there is also precedent for putting such people in front of military tribunals if they have committed war crimes.

Why we (all western governments) choose to ignore this is a mystery to me.

 

I'd choose two methods for the dead, and one for the wounded.
1-dead-Have menstruating females (unclean) attend to the body and sew it into a pig skin. Then have them act as pallbearers during a public procession to the burial site. This will ensure everyone can see the terrorists final destination (based upon their beliefs).
2-dead-If we decide for environmental reasons that we don't want to bury such pollution in the ground they should be recycled. Feed them to hungry pigs, that upon ingestion will break the terrorist down into eco-friendly components. Again, allow for the public to see the procession to the recycling pen, in order to insure they understand Joe Jihadi's final destination.
3-wounded-Medics should carry a small, air tight bag of used tampons. Upon encountering a wounded Jihadi, the bullet hole should be plugged with one of these (contact with menstrual fluids=unclean and can't go to heaven). Once his life is saved and he is returned to full health, Joe Jihadi should be given a dose of Curare or another similar type drug, so as to paralyze the subjects voluntary muscles without imparing the involuntary muscles as to not inhibit respiration or heartbeat. Once the subject has reached the state where he is concious, but unable to move, he should be thrown into a pen with feral pigs. In this manner the Jihadi gets to fully appreciate as the pigs gnaw of his lips, eyeballs, and other tender parts. Again, the pigs recycle the Hadji into other less toxic components. The curare has no effect if taken orally or ingested, so we don't poison any perfectly good pigs and the Jihadi's will realize that we will dispose of them in such a manner as to cancel their trip to paradise.


.

 

Yeah...I think a grave sight might become a shrine or target...best cremate them...or hog tie them and strap them to a rotating B-52 bomb rack and carpet bomb the HQ of these losers...

 

I am appalled.

What does our civilisation gain, by sinking ourselves to the level of barbarity of these violent, fundamentalist criminals? This is exactly what they want. The best advertising campaign for Al-Qaida and their ilk, were the scenes from Abu Ghraib.

Do you people really think we can regain our moral high ground with lobotomy, corpse desecration, and executing them without trial? What do these suggestions say about the state of our humanity?

KB is correct; the only proper method is to detain captured combatants, for the duration of the hostilities.

 

And continue to be laughed at...this is what they understand. A message needs to be sent, not to the high command, but for anyone thinking of doing this...they need to KNOW what awaits them, not fame, not money, not any virgins, but demonstrable condemnation not a comfortable jail cell, but their worst nightmare...
What are we afraid of? That they might start bombing and shooting us in the streets? Guess what, it's already happening, they have played their last card...we can try and nip this in the bud, or we can die a death from a thousand cuts...we are already dying as a society, new rules, laws and restrictions...all slow, weak responses that are patently not working. You can wring your hands and bemoan the state of the world or you can take a stand and try to change it...we've tried the softly softly approach...we need to send them messages that they will understand...we also need to follow up these people's families, permanent detain or deport close friend and family...so that anyone thinking of doing this will know their families won't be 'looked after'...but punished. Civilised laws only work for civilised people...it's "can't we all talk about this like adults' people who just put barriers between people who want to actually do something...

 

The only wrong thing that happened was that tese scenes were made public.

 

Unfortunately - they do now enjoy the same protections as normal combatants....but didn't/wouldn't have in WWII!

The sea change for the treatment of individuals rather than signatory nations' armed forces was the 1949 Geneva Convention. Previously - the various articles and annexes of the Hague Rules of Land Warfare (Hague III IIRC?) had more holes in them than the proverbial swiss cheese. There was the wrinkle over them not being in place when only one side as a signatory, and there were the many and various wrinkles over classes of armed civilians that fell outside the (very brief) conditions for protection under Hague. And of course....they only applied in time of war...wars BETWEEN two signatory nations, not inside one!

Given the number of nations in Europe and the Far East that hosted "guerrilla insurgencies" (as we'd call them now) on the victorious Allies' side - after the end of the war, the new Geneva Convention was constructed and worded to take the focus of the guarantees of protections away from nations and national armies...and made them apply to individuals. Therefore - the protections of 1949 Geneva from that point applied to terrorists...one man's terrorist being another man's freedom fighter etc....as individuals under arms.

There is one (1) wrinkle, however. Under 1949 Geneva, although they have a wide range of protections previously afforded under Hague only to "military" personnel and combatants in wartime, terrorists/insurgents/guerrillas should receive the civilian punishment for their crimes I.E they shouldn't be tried by court martial and shot or otherwise punished, as per military justice - they should receive the correct due civil process for their crimes. I.E. murder. And receive the correct civil punishment for their crimes - as they are not, after all, "prisoners of war".

That was the whole point of the "Blanket"/"Dirty protest" in the Maze Prison in Northern Ireland during the troubles - a "hearts and minds" campaign by IRA inmates to force the British government to treat Republican terrorists as prisoners of war rather than civil murderers and criminals. It being the Provisional IRA's view that they were at war...but the British government's attitude that...although they WERE protected in many ways by 1949 Geneva...they were still only "criminals" and to be punished/incarcerated as such.

Now....personally speaking....that's not right; not when fighting insurgents or scum like IS who wouldn't give a second's thought to observing OUR troops' rights under 1949 Geneva...but WE have to give THEM their Geneva protections! Yes, we ARE fighting with one hand behind our backs...because whether at home or abroad, it means the shits aren't scared of what we'll do to them!

 

GS,

Playing nice does not work. General Mattis said it best, "No better friend, no worse enemy". In fighting an insurgency, a radical group or running an insurgency against a repressive government, the hardest thing to overcome is the peoples fear of brutal reprisals from the bad guys. The very real threat that they will be beated, killed, raped, tortured or have to endure whatever creative manner of pain and suffering they can devise as punishment for not abiding by their rules and supporting thier cause, keeps them from cooperating with people that are trying to give them some sort of self determination, a route to a better life economically and educationally. As for the current crop of Jihadi's, they're mostly dirt poor, under-educated, and really have no prospects for a better future. They can't really visualize that they could have a different and better life, they are brain washed in the Madrasas into believing that the western infidels are the root cause for their crappy lives and that they can help stop this by killing the infidels. If Allah so wills that they die in the attempt, so much the better because they will achieve paradise and rich rewards for their sacrifice. A very similar reason for why we have gang problems here in the US.
There are the 10% that are courageous enough to stand up to the bad guys, understanding there are many things worse than dying. These are controlled by brutal retaliations against family and loved ones, and examples of these people are used to keep the sheeple in line. The only way to beat the bad guys is to take away their hope of a greater reward. Let the people they're repressing understand by our actions against our enemies, that while we are a benevolent people and really do wish to help them, you really, really don't want us as an enemy. Yes we need to be brutal, but the brutality needs to have purpose and focus. It must never be used against civilians or innocents, only active enemy fighters and suicide bombers. Blow yourself up, we gather the remaining dribs of meat, put it in a bucket and slop the hogs, suicide bombers reconsider their chances at paradise.

The crap at Abu Ghraib, was uncalled for, a bunch of ill trained, ill disciplined, idiots, and pervs, working for an incompetant officer. They got bored with sleeping around with one another and started playing silly arsed games with the prisoners. That is different than a focused attempt to use our enemies beliefs and greatest fears against them.

 

They should have been treated as "enemy combatants" rather than prisoners of war OR criminals.

One must realize that under international law, there is a provision for "combatants who do not qualify for prisoner of war status." In the case of these turds, they can be held indefinitely (until the entire Islamic Jihad movement signs a peace agreement) and can be tried by any lawfully constituted court - to include a military tribunal - for war crimes.

Most of these guys could be shot for war crimes. The rest could be locked up in cement cells without contact with anyone except perhaps an annual visit from the red cross. Feed them twice a day. Bacon would be nice... No TV. No Koran. A few books, perhaps - anything written by retired navy SEALs would be appropriate. Forget about them. There's a nice abandoned navy base at Adak, halfway out the Aleutian chain that would be ideal for this.