Charlie9:39AMApr 28th 2008

Many of our violations of international law (secret prisons, torture) are not disputed by the Bush administration. The only question is, how does a civilized people bring war criminals to justice?

How?

paulnashtn10:13AMApr 28th 2008

What an extreme left-wing question!! What a crock

suzanne10:32AMApr 28th 2008

The Geneva convention has been in force since the 1950's I believe that is how we protect our own men & women from abuse, it is the only way to get legal prosecution of war crimes.

John McCain has confronted Bush on his interpretation of the Geneva Convention as he should have.

Suzanne

Clinton 08'

Terri11:44AMApr 28th 2008

Perhaps folks need a reminder of the atrocities that were being perpetrated by others that made the Geneva convention a necessity in the first place. Then take another look at what you are blaming your government for now. I agree with the poster who asked How?
How far would you go in your own house to protect your children/family and discourage future abuse? What would you do? It's a damnably fine line.

Uphold our Standing in the World1:27PMApr 28th 2008

We need to uphold the Geneva Conventions. This is what presidential candidate Senator Hillary Clinton has said on the issue (on the floor of the Senate):

"We must stand for the rule of law before the world, especially when we are under stress and under threat. We must show that we uphold our most profound values. The rule of law cannot be compromised... Our values are central. Our national security interests in the world are vital. And nothing should be of greater concern... than the young men and women who are, right now, wearing our nation’s uniform, serving in dangerous territory."

coolpharmer1:44PMApr 28th 2008

Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War

http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/91.htm

We have violated some portions of this agreement blatantly and consciously. So, unfortunately, I must answer "yes".

This must not continue. If we hope to start working with other governments in order to establish a more stable world, one in which war is not the answer. We must never torture. Our national reputation is built on our opposition to torture.

The next president has to make this clear to the world. Obama and Hillary have on numerous occasions, but McCain voted against a bill to ban waterboarding, and then applauded President Bush for vetoing that ban, though reputation was built on his opposition to torture.

AMERICANPIE1:51PMApr 28th 2008

AMERICANS FIRST! IF WE HAVE TO TORTURE TERRORISTS TO KEEP OUR CHILDREN SAFE --- SO BE IT!

I'M AFRAID OBAMA HAS TOO MANY TIES TO TERRORISTS. OBAMA HAS BASED HIS ENTIRE CAMPAIGN ON "LIES"!

I AM SICK OF BEING CALLED RACIST JUST BECAUSE I DO NOT SUPPORT OBAMA... Not every American believes Obama is the best choice for a variety of reasons and we are all entitled to support whomever we wish, including his supporters.

Obama is a "UNITER" all right. He has certainly united the most hateful group of supporters I have ever seen.

CLINTON or MCCAIN '08 = Experience DOES Matter!

Carla1:55PMApr 28th 2008

The Geneva Convention is not a little nicety that we can ignore when the mood strikes us. It was supposed to be a "civilized" way of dealing with the most uncivilized of all pursuits - "war". We now know that the "preemptive" war in Iraq was a sham. The reasons for it are unclear. We have lost our standing in the war after this. We are the nation which after World War II rebuilt our former enemies, Germany and Japan in the hopes that it would prevent them from going to war as had happened in the times between the World Wars. This strategy worked and the money spent in this effort was well worth it. Now, we find ourselves in an interminable war which we can find no honorable way of extricating ourselves from. Do we leave or do we stay. I think we all hope for a third alternative but we do not see one in the horizon.

John McCain, himself a former prisoner of war has stated that torture does not extract information. Any information gotten through this method is suspicious.

Fear is a terrible taskmaster. It leads us to do and accept a situation that we would have found untenable in better times. We must let go of the fear and admit to ourselves that we have eschewed all of the rights we say we hold sacrosanct when it comes to the treatment of prisoners.

Let us once again become the great nation that used mercy rather than revenge in those hazardous times after the second World War.

Joe3:28PMApr 28th 2008

IF ALL THE OTHER NATIONS THINK WE ARE SO BAD, MAYBE WE SHOULD STOP SENDING OUR HARD EARNED TAX DOLLARS TO THOSE COUNTRIES IN FOREIGN AID. SEEMS THEY REALLY LOVE OUR MONEY.

John Aaron3:51PMApr 28th 2008

The United States & British Militaries are the only countries that follow the Geneva Convention, yet soldiers from these countries are always tortured and executed when they are taken prisoner by terrorists. Where is the outcry from the left over the abduction torture, and murder of SSG Matt Maupin? And why is it they they are so concerned over the rights of foriegn insurgents? According to the Geneva Convention the insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan are "Illegal combatants" are entitled to no protection from under the Geneva Convention whatso ever, yet the U.S. Government treats detainees humanly and punishes soldiers who do not (Abu Graib scandal). I am a First Sergeant in the U.S Army, and always marvel at the stupidity of journalists and the public at large for thier comments about Iraq. Everyone in the states thinks they are an expert on counter-insurgency warfare and always has some foolish or idiotic opinion about it. Remember:

America is NOT at WAR, The U.S. Military is at WAR. America is at the Mall.

landmreyn84:09PMApr 28th 2008

Yes, we are a rogue state thanks to George W. Bush, who is a dictator. Don't be surprised if he bombs
Iran next. He is utterly contemptible. The rest of the world is counting the days until he goes back to Crawford.

John Aaron4:11PMApr 28th 2008

Most Americans have no idea what a Rogue State is. They think they have it so bad here with unemployment at 5.2% (3.5% is considered full employment). Try living in the Middle East, Eastern Europe or South America where unemployment is 50% or higher. Gas prices so high you can't afford that X-tra large White Chocolate Fat-Free Latte from Starbucks? Well in Germany gas is Approximately 9 dollars a gallon. Many Americans are a bunch of spoiled, overweight panty-waists. They think they know the world yet are extremely naive about what a dung heap much of the rest of the world is. The Military and the Government are doing a decent job of fighting terrorism (no more domestic attacks since 9-11 eh?). They are not perfect, and have made some mistakes in the past and will in the future. We cannot let a fear or making a mistake prevent us from doing all we can to save lives. If the rights of some foreign psycopaths are broken to save the lives of innocent people, then it is a risk we must take. Included in my list of morons is the fool that posted this question.

So America! go back to your fat free lattes or you 20 piece McNuggets and relax. Sit back and read bad books written by mediocre authors at Barnes and Noble or watch your re-runs of Seinfeld with the knowledge that You have alot of incredibly brave honest and hard working Soldiers, Marines, Sailors, Airmen, Coasties, and Police protecting you butts as you go in blissfull ignorance throughout your lives.

John Aaron4:24PMApr 28th 2008

Most people have no idea what torture is either. (for most Americans it is making them exercise). I have handled detainees. Torture is worthless because you could get anyone to say anything to make it stop. I could get anyone to admit they are the Easter Bunny with enought torture. Waterboarding is not torture, and Waterboarding has only been used on the rarest of occasions, used to often it is ineffective. The U.S. does not torture people, Saying this on a message board like this is a waste of time though for people here have this pre-concieved notion of what goes on In Iraq, or their government and they do not want that false illusion shattered. Wake up folks, the Military. police and Government are made up of people just like anyone else. No-one is "brain washed" and these people have a conscience and a sense of right and wrong like everbody does. They are trying to protect this country as best they can under rough conditions. The enemy does not play by any rules and will use any means no matter how evil to kill.

David4:37PMApr 28th 2008

And if we use any means in order to protect does that make us good? Is torture means to a good end? Or do the ends not justify the means?

Kent4:38PMApr 28th 2008

I believe there is a distinction that doesn't rely on the question of intent, but rather affiliation.

The U.S. and its Allies (other than the Soviet Union) abided by the Geneva convention, because the POWs we held were from the militaries of other countries, such as Germany and Japan.

On the other hand, the prisoners we now hold at Gitmo haven't worn the uniform of a country, such as Iraq. They don't fight on behalf of a movement, such as the IRA (returning Northern Ireland to the Irish Republic), the PLO (freeing Palestine from Israeli control), or the Contras (overthrowing the Soviet-backed Sandinista regime in Nicaragua and establishing a democratic government).

Muslim terrorists, Hamas, al-Qaidi, etc., are simply attacking Israel and western countries deemed a threat to Islam. Other than the idea of all western people converting to Islam, there is no clear idea of what terrorists want to achieve, in order to stop hostilities.

Since the prisoners at Gitom aren't fighting in the military of a sovereign nation or an organized militia fighting to take over the government of a sovereign nation or create a new soverereign nation from a portion of an existing country, I think there is a distinction that can be made in terms of compliance with the Geneva convention.

In other words, a member of the Iraqi Republican Guards taken prisoner during combat in '03 must be treated according to the rules of the Geneva Convention, but members of al-Qaida shouldn't.

American4:38PMApr 28th 2008

I always said Bush was the right hand of Lucifer

Edward Williams4:39PMApr 28th 2008

The Geneva Convention was originally established to protect legitmate, honorable soldier's of legitmate standing military forces of specific lsit of countries and was not ever intended to apply to illegitmate, radical terroist who owe no aligence to their country or people.

Debra S.5:29PMApr 28th 2008

This is a very important issue, but why now? I guess you really don't want to put any more light on Obama, until (and if) he weathers the Rev. Wright debacle.

Rev. G.D. H.5:43PMApr 28th 2008

The "Geneva Conventions" are just that, Copnventions=agreements among presumed honorable States. However to utilize an example that may be understood by many [but should not be construed as more than an example to illustrate a situation], a Convention is an agreement to "play" by a set of rules. In the arena of sport there are officials and penealties for getting caught breaking the rules. In the world, there are no officials and really no rules, just conventions that set down some desirable standards and self interest that has often limited some acts. Examples: poison gas; nuclear weapons; neutron bomb; biological weapons; all of which have been used but at some point viewed as counter-productive. Terror, torture, extermination, are far from unknown, at least somewhat effective and in use thru much of the world today. Is this desirable? That depends upon your viewpoint as Islamo-fascists might well [almost assuredly] would say,"yes!", at least in acyion. To return to the sport example, when an opponent is violating a rule to his advantage and getting away with it, most readers will recognize the "necessity" to play by the prevailing standard! If winning is important, one cannot give up an advantage to the opponent. That is human nature, history, and factual. In the world of human conflict, to give up an advantage may well be the seed of serious deleterious effects, among them survival. At its essence, conflict has nearly always been played out at the level of capacity and desire of the opponents. To play with "one hand tied behind your back" is hardly conducive to victory and survival. To those who would put "world opinion" in play, one must ask if being liked is superior to being respected / feared. Yes feared, for fear of consquences makes for "civilized" behavior. A lack therof can be seen in the inner-cities, especially gangs which rely upon fear for their very existence. "Geneva Conventions" are a nice idea but somewhat akin to the antiquated idea of "civilians". "Civilians" manufacture the weapons, make the major political decisions, create new combatants, succor present combatants and generally make conflict possible. Therefore, as in WWI and WWII, they are legitimate targets. Still don't believe? Read the memoirs of the North Vietnamese and the statements of the current Muslims whith whom we are engaged. One attrbutes its victory to effect upon "civilian" poplations, the other is attempting to repeat. OPEN YOUR EYES TO REALITY whether you like it or not. Your survival and most certainly the survival of future generations depend upon it!

Paul6:32PMApr 28th 2008

Well, it would seem to me that yes, we are a Geneva country.

We have done exactly what the Europeans have done since 1945 and they are what most of the liberals want today. No judgements, no values, no right and no wrong,and no limits on anything. Free drugs, no God, abortion on demand, welfare and voting rights to any and all, including illegal aliens, marriage between same sex couples and on and on and on. Now you question whether we are a non-Geneva country? No, we are exactly what a Geneva country should be!