Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch
I'm more then curious about how the Geneva convention applies in any way shape or form in this instance. First and foremost, the Taliban which is not a legal government is not a signatory to any of the articles of the convention.
Secondly, the Geneva convention is extremely specific about people fighting that are not in uniform, or who murder civilians while not in uniform. none of these guys are wearing any kind of uniform and disguise themselves as civilians, therefore they are not protected under the convention and there is no due process. In fact you can basically march these people in front of a fire squad.
In the same way, Kadr is not considered a child soldier because he was not a member of any armed forces structure and did not wear a uniform, in fact he is part of a insurgancy which is Al-Queda which means that he is not afforded protection under the Convention or under the UCMJ or any nation state.
I guess I'm confused about the whole application of any kind of international law or application of the Geneva Convention in this case.
|
Yeah, you're completely right regarding the uniform thing. I think the Taliban and other militant movements in Afghanistan constitute guerrilla forces and would be eligible for POW status if they wore uniforms and carried their weapons openly. But as it stands now, they don't.
I remember reading something about child soldiers in Africa: one of the problems with them is that they panic and get scared far more easily, and become easily confused, and situations often escalate out of hand where cooler heads may have prevailed amongst adults. And they're often indoctrinated to believe that everything is life-and-death, kill-or-be-killed. Khadr's actions here (assuming he did actually throw the grenade, which is still a major point of contention) fit almost perfectly with that pattern.