6 ms·
So, the Geneva convention is basically a lip-service treaty only enforced when its convenient? Sounds like most treaties come to think of it.
by Zelphyr 11y ago
So, the Geneva convention is basically a lip-service treaty only enforced when its convenient? Sounds like most treaties come to think of it.
- dogma1138 11y agoThe Geneva convention doesn't cover irregulars, this is the UN treaty against torture which like most UN conventions is an utter joke.
- SCAQTony 11y agoThe Geneva Convention is pretty clear and the United States signed on. Yale Law School Lillian Goldman Library: Article 2 & 5: "...Prisoners of war are in the power of the hostile Power, but not of the individuals or corps who have captured them. They must at all times be humanely treated and protected, particularly against acts of violence, insults and public curiosity. Measures of reprisal against them are prohibited. : "...No coercion may be used on prisoners to secure information to the condition of their army or country. Prisoners who refuse to answer may not be threatened, insulted, or exposed to unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment of any kind whatever. ..." http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/geneva02.asp#art5 http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/geneva02.asp#art5
- venomsnake 11y agoA treaty is only as strong as the will of the other countries to enforce it.
- dogma1138 11y agoOf their army or country. Irregulars as in terrorists, spies, mercenaries etc. Are not protected by the Geneva convention and are not considered prisoners of war.
- SCAQTony 11y agoInteresting legal point. We never declared war on "al Qaeda" since it's a ultimately just a logo and the combatants could be labeled criminals.