OCA
VIP Member
Originally posted by st8_o_mind
Several of the deaths of Iraqiis and Afghanistans in captivity have been classified as homocides by military investigators. Is a bullet in the brain less or more vile than cutting off someone's head? Is there a moral difference?
If the execution of Berg is horrible, then why does the US continue to execute prisoners? I believe Texas, when Shrub was governor, set the record for executions. Would it be okay with you if theyhad given Berg a trial before they cut his head off?
And with regard to your previous post about the Geneva Convention, I just came upon this in the today's post:
"The backdrop for the policy was an event that occurred on May 1, 2003. President Bush landed that day on teh deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier off San Diago and declared that major combat operations were over. His declaration had direct but unpublicized consequences for those detained in Iraq military officials say: It ment they were no longer to be treated as prisoners of war, but instead as civilians held byan occupying power.
That ment, the officials said, that the detainees would come under the protections of the fourth artivcle of the Geneva Conventions, which explicitly allows long-term detentions of those considered to pose a threat to governing authorities."
Apparently, the Geneva Convention does apply assuming these un-named "military officials" are correct.
I'll wait until somebody is convicted of first degree murder before I believe that charge.