(c) that of carrying arms openly; (d) that of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.
And hiding under the skirts of women, hiding in schools occupied by children and hiding in Mosques among the faithful, all while non-uniformed sans a flag, is following the laws and customs of war?
Just for shits & giggles, tiny ... tell us where these people should be placed. Would you try them in civilian or military courts? Would you release them back into their home countries? Would you place them into our federal prisons?
Vi
not necessarily, 6. only if there was evidence. then sure, send them back to country of origin. if they decide to fight us WE WILL KILL THEM. and yes, they still deserve a trial.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_war
especialy this part:
During conflict,
punishment for violating the laws of war may consist of a specific, deliberate and limited violation of the laws of war in
reprisal.
Soldiers who break specific provisions of the laws of war lose the protections and status afforded as
prisoners of war. At that point they become an
unlawful combatant but they must still be "
treated with humanity and, in case of trial, shall not be deprived of the rights of fair and regular trial", because they are still covered by
GC IV Art 5. For example in 1976 foreign soldiers fighting for
FNLA were captured by the
MPLA in the civil war that broke out when
Angola gained independence from
Portugal in 1975. In the
Luanda Trial, after "
a regularly constituted court" found them guilty of being
mercenaries, three Britons and an American were shot by a
firing squad on
July 10,
1976. Nine others were imprisoned for terms of 16 to 30 years.
Spies and
terrorists may be subject to civilian law or military tribunal for their acts and in practice have been subjected to
torture and/or execution. The laws of war neither approve nor condemn such acts, which fall outside their scope. However, nations that have signed the
UN Convention Against Torture have committed themselves not to use torture on anyone for any reason. Citizens and soldiers of nations which have not signed the Fourth Geneva Convention are also not protected by it (Article 4: "
Nationals of a State which is not bound by the Convention are not protected by it".), whether they are spies or terrorists. Also, citizens and soldiers of nations which have not signed and do not abide by the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions are not protected by them. (Article 2, of both Conventions: "
[The High Contracting Parties] shall furthermore be bound by the Convention in relation to [a Power which is not a contracting party], if the latter accepts and applies the provisions thereof". note: emphasis added)
the US has been bound by UN conventions against torture since 1988.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN_Convention_Against_Torture
certainly ther must b e trials. most of those that were released were released because they COULD NOT be tried because it would no doubt be revealed that they had been tortured.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habeas_corpus#War_on_Terror
then theres habeas corpus... wich was shit on by the bush administration with the hepl of that slime alberto gonzales and a scared and spineless congress.
i am embarresed by this as an american.
land of the free my ass. more like, land where we can put you in prison forever with no charges. because the suspension of the writ also applies to american citizens. you, me, everybody.
so, you go on ahead and keep defending those thieves of liberty, those power-mad paranoids. go ahead and keep parroting the arguments of propagandists. your vision is warped by the fear they told you to feel. i pity you and hope you WAKE THE FUCK UP someday.