You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

1
16

[–] glassuser 1 points 16 points (+17|-1) ago 

No, that's not true. They have rights. They have the right to not be murdered, mutilated, subjected to cruel treatment, subjected to torture, the right to be required to provide no information but their name, rank, and identifying number. They have a right to basic holding quarters and daily food ration and water to keep them in good health. They have these rights because the united states willingly signed a treaty which compels us to respect those rights of prisoners of war.

1
4

[–] Gorillion 1 points 4 points (+5|-1) ago  (edited ago)

I understand your angle. Them being PoWs when detained.

But do you mean the Geneva Convention? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Geneva_Convention
That's not as water tight as you indicate. The Patriot Act and relabeling prisoners as "illegal combatants" has offered some workarounds that the World at large hasn't seemed too keen to challenge.

This is a stealth army. Human Beings being used as biological weapons. Aggressive breeding populations, used to change the demographic make-up of their targeted nations. The Geneva Convention was not set up for this sort of warfare.
Except in this: Biological Warfare is also banned by the Geneva Convention.
Are these people or weapons? They're certainly being used as weapons.

Sovereignty is a supposed "right" too. Where does that start and end, versus the individual rights of would-be human weapons?

2
3

[–] kingminos 2 points 3 points (+5|-2) ago 

Terrosts have not the rights of solders. That's why you butcher them out ruthlessly ... men/women/children doe-eye babaz ... stack the bleeding bodies high enough that none can climb over.

1
0

[–] Alopix 1 points 0 points (+1|-1) ago 

So if a day of the rope comes and the government calls it terrorism we'll have to kill you too, got it.

0
1

[–] stradian 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

The Geneva Conventions do not recognize any lawful status for combatants in conflicts not involving two or more nation states. A state in such a conflict is legally bound only to observe Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions and may ignore all of the other Articles.

Surprise. Unless we go to war with Mexico, there is no treaty standing in our way. They still have no rights. They are covered under article 3. However, they are still criminals in the process of committing a crime.

0
1

[–] 00001000001100110101 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Fuck the EU and the UN for forcing countries like the US into adopting their idiotic policies. They end up being horribly one sided and always seem to benefit nigger nations

4
1

[–] Tallest_Skil 4 points 1 points (+5|-4) ago 

They have a right to basic holding quarters and daily food ration and water to keep them in good health.

Not if they’re deported the day they’re caught! Or just shot, since they’re foreign combatants.

They have these rights because the united states willingly signed a treaty

“International law” doesn’t exist.

rights of prisoners of war.

So just don’t take prisoners.

0
4

[–] glassuser 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

“International law” doesn’t exist.

Not relevant here.

So just don’t take prisoners.

Now you're cooking with gas.