Comments

  1. Pondering_It_All

    Little of the news coverage ever mentions the simple fact that when hostilities end (by December 31?), we will no longer be in a state of war against the Taliban. According to the Geneva Conventions, we are then obligated to repatriate all POWs. (That covers all Taliban POWs, who were part of the armed forces of the government of Afghanistan at the start of the war, but not Al Queda members.) None of these five Taliban soldiers have ever been accused of War Crimes, so we would have no grounds for keeping them.

    Since they will be released in six months anyway, why not get something in return now?

  2. Roy West

    Pondering. Please refresh your knowledge of the Geneva Conventions. It applies to a declared war between two nations. We are not at war with any nation at the moment. Certainly not Afghanistan. We are in a police action against terrorist organizations all over the world who have absolutely no respect for the Geneva Conventions, therefore, we do not have to abide. The people released were responsible for war crimes against humanity. They could have been tried thus. Remember the Nuremberg trials after WWII and the trials against various Japanese generals and officials responsible for the killing of innocents and prisoners of war. There are legal precedents that could have kept these terrorist at Gitmo long after any military actions cease in Afghanistan. Plus we will have a presence there until 2016 anyway. The government of Afghanistan will supposedly continue the battle against the terrorist after we are gone.

    Just my thoughts on your post

    • Why we could not have just tried these “terrorists” in a court of law you say? We tortured them. We cannot put them on trial because we committed “war crimes” of the kind we executed Germans for committing in WWII. And we don’t want the world to find out the details of those who were tortured now do we?

    • Jon

      Allow me to snip and slice a little:

      “We are in a police action against terrorist organizations all over the world who have absolutely no respect for the Geneva Conventions, therefore, we do not have to abide.”

      Just because others disobey the law, we now have permission to do the same?

      “The people released were responsible for war crimes against humanity.”

      Alleged by whom? They were never accused in any court of law. Which may answer your following question:

      “They could have been tried thus.”

      But they weren’t. Why not? Perhaps there just wasn’t any evidence?

      Those at Nuremberg and in Japan were tried in courts, with defense attorneys present. Those in Guantanamo? Not so much.

      So no. Your thoughts, while welcome, seem a little unclear to me. Thanks for taking the time to let me know them.

      Jon

      PS – There may still be an active declaration of war with North Korea. Not sure about that. Still, a ‘police action’ that involves a B-52 bombing raid strikes me as a lot more like doublespeak than honestly calling a spade a spade. J.