| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Great White North | |
| Canadian troops told Geneva rules don't apply to Taliban | |
| 2006-05-31 | |
That decision strips detainees of key rights and protections under the rules of war, including the right to be released at the end of the conflict and not to be held criminally liable for lawful combat. “The whole purpose of those regulations is to know if Geneva applies,” said Amir Attaran, a law professor at the University of Ottawa who has been pressing the Defence Department for details of its detainee policy for months. The 1991 Canadian regulations — developed during the Persian Gulf war — included provisions to hold tribunals to determine a detainee's status under Geneva if there is any doubt. | |
| Posted by:lotp |
| #19 Geneva applies mainly to armed conflicts fought between internationally or diplomatically recognized, sovereign, protractive, organized national Governments, i.e. and the organized linear uniformed armies therefrom. Armed groups not recognized as such, outlawed, nor recognized as de facto "government(s)-in-exile" or "government(s)-in-being" do not fall under Geneva. At Gitmo, the Army can hold detainees potentially forever until such time the Army is satisfied of that person's role, or in the alt the Fed mandates the Army to release or turn over to other legal authority. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2006-05-31 22:18 |
| #18 M00ks have to be flushed Twice please. It's a long way to Hell. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-05-31 22:14 |
| #17 Ummm .... let's let that "mook" talk die, okay? |
| Posted by: lotp 2006-05-31 17:52 |
| #16 They do fall under Geneva Conventions: as illegal combatants what may be shot without trial. Do any of the post-geneva human rights conventions prohibit summary execution? |
| Posted by: john 2006-05-31 17:37 |
| #15 Mooks have to be flushed, so it's unlikely. But who knows, Brits have odd rules. |
| Posted by: 6 2006-05-31 16:50 |
| #14 Howard, can one hunt mooks from a mount? |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2006-05-31 15:56 |
| #13 Howard exemplifies British sportsmanship. |
| Posted by: 6 2006-05-31 15:54 |
| #12 It's all in the ROE... somewhere... |
| Posted by: Chang Ominesing2659 2006-05-31 14:14 |
| #11 Only the ones who fire at us first, mind. |
| Posted by: Howard UK 2006-05-31 14:07 |
| #10 Let mook season commence. |
| Posted by: Howard UK 2006-05-31 14:07 |
| #9 A whiff of sanity from up North. However, General Gauthier's comment warranted further comment, which I do at my website. |
| Posted by: Ptah 2006-05-31 11:53 |
| #8 And the phueching Taliban and other terrorists were signatores of the Geneva Convention on what date ? |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2006-05-31 10:37 |
| #7 They do fall under Geneva Conventions: as illegal combatants what may be shot without trial. |
| Posted by: gromgoru 2006-05-31 10:16 |
| #6 If they don't have a recognizable uniform, they don't fall under the Geneva protection. I am glad to see this since most of them are terrorist loosers anyway. |
| Posted by: DarthVader 2006-05-31 09:21 |
| #5 I think the moral of the story is 'Take no prisoners.' |
| Posted by: glenmore 2006-05-31 09:13 |
| #4 Just cause Perv recognizes them doesn't mean we do. And if combatants don't act as soldiers are obliged to under the GC, they don't deserve GC protection, even if they are in an "army". |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2006-05-31 09:07 |
| #3 I'm not sure if this is a good thing or not. If they are to be tried a criminals and not combatants then where do our soldiers stand when it comes to colateral damage. Say a soldier kills and innocent in a gunbattle or mistaken identity. |
| Posted by: 49 Pan 2006-05-31 08:58 |
| #2 How is the GC status of the 'Afghan' Talibs affected if Perv starts recognizing the 'Pak' Talibs currently running Wazooistan? |
| Posted by: Seafarious 2006-05-31 08:56 |
| #1 Sounds like Harper is no longer willing to live in Howard's shadow. Good. This is the kind of leadership we need from a broader swath of our "allies", eh. Now if we could coordinate our immigration and entry policies... |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2006-05-31 08:42 |