Notice: Forums will be shutdown by June 2019

To focus on better serving our members, we've decided to shut down the POF forums.

While regular posting is now disabled, you can continue to view all threads until the end of June 2019. Event Hosts can still create and promote events while we work on a new and improved event creation service for you.

Thank you!

Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Current Events  >      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 kabiosile
Joined: 11/3/2005
Msg: 104
view profile
History
What would Jack Bauer do?Page 5 of 6    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6)


Tell that to the 911 passengers on those ill fated planes.Tell that to the 911 passengers on those ill fated planes.Tell that to the 911 passengers on those ill fated planes.Tell that to the 911 passengers on those ill fated planes.


Keep telling yourself this. Your mantra might make you believe it. They knew the attack was coming before it happened. It was not the intelligence department that failed the US it was the administration for not taking it seriously. Torture would not have helped anyone on 911 either.
 Kaos86
Joined: 3/7/2007
Msg: 105
What would Jack Bauer do?
Posted: 5/8/2009 7:45:04 PM
You are right and after the Obama Fly over Terrorist attack last week of New York Citywe now know that 911 was only the first wave of his diabolical plan.
Keep your head in the sand there safe in the knowledge there are others protecting your right to hate anyone opposed to your ideology.

Remember "24'" is mearly a TV show.
That is what is so funny about this thread.
Janeane Garafolo and her ilk drinking the koolaid as their heads explode in percieved indignation.
Verry funny!
 kabiosile
Joined: 11/3/2005
Msg: 106
view profile
History
What would Jack Bauer do?
Posted: 5/8/2009 8:38:41 PM


Keep your head in the sand there safe in the knowledge there are others protecting your right to hate anyone opposed to your ideology.



LOL you obviously do not now me at all. I do not hate anyone. I have love for my friends and even those whom would consider themselves my enemy. I do not allow myself to have enemies I follow the teachings of Jesus, Gandhi, Buddha, Martin Luther King Jr, the Dalai Lama and all of the other great masters this world has ever seen whom have taught the way of Non-violence, love, compassion and forgiveness. To love you friends families, and love your enemies even more for this lack of love is the cause of their suffering that they go out and try to make others suffer. I firmly believe wholeheartedly that it is only love that will set us free. War and it's ilk will only drag us down into more suffering.

I have plenty of family members I love dearly that think in similar ways to you though they are not as fanatical as you come off in your posts. I think it would surprise you if you knew how many of my family are/have been military that have been to as well as died in wars. My immediate family has served in the military, in every single war this country had all the way back before the revolution. I even have some family that were natives and even some that were fighting before the revolution. I love them all just the same.

I simply know that the better way for mankind is to leave war behind. Just because someone has a different view than me does not mean I hate them. They are entitled to their view just the same.

I have no feeling but, love in my heart for the soldiers. In fact I love them all the more for the garbage they have been put through for no good reason especially since WWII.

We have not had one single war since WWII that "protected our freedoms." They were operations that had to do with "interests" meaning protecting corporate $. Nothing to do with our freedoms.

I know this is the mantra they attempt to con young men into joining up for wars but, it is a crock of shite. Soldiers are all too often just poor kids whom are taken advantage of as well. I feel for them because they really want to do the right thing and get hoodwinked with propaganda such as you and many on the right and left spew about protecting our freedoms, their love for their country gets taken advantage of and they get shoved into situations like Nam, Iraq etc etc.

Shame shame shame.

Thank God my grandfather whom was a marine in WWII whom fought against Japan in the islands saved me from the same foolishness. When I was a young foolish boy nearing my 18th B-day I was going to join up for desert storm and he pulled me aside and told me, "son you dont need to go to this one. Our family has been serving, fighting, suffering, and dying in every war this nation has fought. If someone was trying to invade us, I would be the first to support your decision to join up, in fact I would drive your butt down there myself but, he told me candidly this one stinks of bullshit, you stay home."

He peeled the wool off my eyes. This is a man whom loved this country and suffered more than you can ever know for it woke me up from the haze of bullshit war movies and other war propaganda. Before that I was captain America much like yourself. After this I turned to study, and took a side interest in American foreign policy.

I suggest a bit of study in that realm for you too. Do some digging on CIA websites that talk about the history of our covert ops. You will find out it has nothing to do with freedom and quite the opposite these days. Sadly, as much as I wish it was not so, our government has been up to no good as well in it's modern history.

I know my speaking about it here is not going to make some change in it but, I offer my voice of dissent because it is what I have to offer my nation. I love it dearly and the people of it and think they deserve to be represented in a better fashion. I believe if most of the people of this nation knew what was going on even just a bit of it, instead of listening to the propaganda, they would not stand for it one bit.

PS I even love you dear brother even though I see clearly by your condoning violence and torture, that you have not found love yet. I pray one day it finds you and sets you free. If I may humbly suggest to you to give compassion, empathy, and most importantly forgiveness a try I think you too will find love and the tears will stream down your face as you are set free. There is no greater feeling I can assure you to not have one single enemy in the world. I can also tell you with 100% certainty that there is no power in this world stronger and able to bring the most backward and wicked man to his knees than love.

Even if I was faced with my own death due to my belief, by the hand of a bully whom would wish to cause harm or tyranny I would gladly give my life for what I believe with non-violence and civil disobedience. I would walk right off of this world into the next like it is a grand parade if that is what it takes. I would also in my last moments forgive my own murderer for they know not what it is that they do.

Here you look like you can use one of these.

As far as this...



Janeane Garafolo and her ilk drinking the koolaid as their heads explode in percieved indignation.
Verry funny!


I do not listen to any kind of talk shows or drink kool-aide I prefer water or tea.

I do not find anything about torture funny at all be it a TV show trying to in some way affect the views of people to make them think it is ok or not.

Torture is pure wickedness invented by minds demented by the lack of love and effected by suffering and madness. It merely causes more problems and suffering and solves none. It is the course of foolishness and the tool of tyranny.

I am saddened greatly that this great nation has backslid so far on this issue. It destroys our standing in the world and cripples our ability to have any kind of sane foreign policy.

It further plays directly into the hands of these terror groups that our government is supposedly against. You cannot be for war & torture and against terror. They are one and the same.
 Kaos86
Joined: 3/7/2007
Msg: 107
What would Jack Bauer do?
Posted: 5/8/2009 9:34:28 PM
My apology kabby its hard to keep track of all leftist hate rants on here with out a score card.

Thats fair you are a conscientious objector I respect that more than the ideologs and hate mongers.


<div class="quote">I have no feeling but, love in my heart for the soldiers. In fact I love them all the more for the garbage they have been put through for no good reason especially since WWII.
So what do you do with tyrants who invade other countries or terrorize and murder their own.
Hitler, Stalin, Ho Chi Min, Mao, Saddam,Castro, Taliban or the many others that remain today.
Should it be allowed or do the people held captive by these tyrants deserve saving?

Please do not lecture me on peace and love till you answer those questions.
As a Christian like me you should understand that evil does exist in this world and at times must be confronted.
Again it is left up to the brave, fortunately I was came at a time in which Canada experienced a long run of peace.

Please do not lecture me on war because you do not have that concept down either.
All wars are faught for land, (and what is under the surface), nothing more nothing less.
Religion is just an excuse.


<div class="quote">I am saddened greatly that this great nation has backslid so far on this issue. It destroys our standing in the world and cripples our ability to have any kind of sane foreign policy.
You are obviously not well versed in your own countries history.
The United States Constitution was forged on the battle grounds of the War for Independence.
Strengthened during the war between the states and came of age during WWI and WWII.
Do you suppose there were any advanced methods of interrogations during those growing pains of your great democracy.

Like I said enjoy your freedom and remember those who fought to preserve it and those who continue to guarantee it... even those who sometimes have to do hard lifting so you can live in self-righteousness while the Jews(NAZI's), Kurds (Saddam) are being gassed or women are being mutilated by the Taliban.

Long live Jack Bauer or at least till Christ comes back to smite the evil doers from the world!
 kabiosile
Joined: 11/3/2005
Msg: 108
view profile
History
What would Jack Bauer do?
Posted: 5/9/2009 1:09:30 AM


So what do you do with tyrants who invade other countries or terrorize and murder their own.
Hitler, Stalin, Ho Chi Min, Mao, Saddam,Castro, Taliban or the many others that remain today.
Should it be allowed or do the people held captive by these tyrants deserve saving?


Since I am no where near as eloquent with words as those whom came before me allow me start with a quote or two from Gandhi and throughout I will add quotes of others throughout the ages to season this post.



I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent.

Nonviolence is the greatest force at the disposal of mankind. It is mightier than the mightiest weapon of destruction devised by the ingenuity of man.

Strength does not come from physical capacity. It comes from an indomitable will.

Non-cooperation is an attempt to awaken the masses, to a sense of their dignity and power. This can only be done by enabling them to realize that they need not fear brute force, if they would but know the soul within.


And one more if I may before I get started, from Buddha.



Victory breeds hatred; the defeated live in pain.
The peaceful live happily, giving up victory and defeat.


It is true there has been and are tyrants in the world and I agree they should be opposed. Where I disagree with your sentiment is with the method of how to do this. I believe in the best course was formalized and set out in great detail by Gandhi. It is the most effective method I have seen, that does not require violence. Getting the people to stand up in non-violent civil disobedience is the best way to deal with a tyrant or an oppressive regime. It has been proven over and over again. I must say however the course of non-violence is not the course of a coward nor, is it always the fastest method but, it's results are far more predictable and appealing than use of violence. Which can sometimes remove a tyrant but, at the cost of leaving other serious consequences that can sometimes be worse than the tyrant.



Nonviolence and cowardice are contradictory terms. Nonviolence is the greatest virtue, cowardice the greatest vice. Nonviolence springs from love, cowardice from hate. Nonviolence always suffers, cowardice would always inflict suffering. Perfect nonviolence is the highest bravery. Non-violent conduct is never demoralizing, cowardice always is.
Nonviolence and cowardice go ill together. I can imagine a fully armed man to be at heart a coward. Possession of arms implies an element of fear, if not cowardice. But true nonviolence is an impossibility without the possession of unadulterated fearlessness.
-Gandhi


Yes people will likely die either way be it if they take up arms or go the route of Gandhi but, in the route of Gandhi the people do not become like the tyrant by taking up violence thereby getting caught up in the cycles it puts into place, which cause more suffering and more often than not inevitably more violence.

Martin Luther King Jr proved once again Gandhi was correct he and those whom stood with him, did the hard part of taking down the tyranny of Jim Crow and the wicked racism and oppression of his time. We have come a long way because of the work and sacrifice he and those whom stood with him gave selflessly and courageously to our nation and we are in a much better situation because of it.

Mandela, proved it again against apartheid. That tyranny also fell in the face of it. It is not the fastest route but, it is one that I believe has the least ill side effects. It can bring a lasting and true peace where war inevitably leaves in it's wake suffering of the level that sometimes the effects last for in some cases hundreds and even thousands of years of conflict. In some places it seems it never stops..

That is one of the major flaws in violence. It is quite unpredictable what will happen once you open up the wicked box.

It merely makes the problems more complex. Forgiveness breaks the cycle of violence. It makes peace possible. It is not war that brings peace even after a war is considered over. It is forgiveness and reconciliation that paves the way for peace in spite of the war.



Please do not lecture me on war because you do not have that concept down either.
All wars are faught for land, (and what is under the surface), nothing more nothing less.
Religion is just an excuse.


I would first like to say that I am not here to lecture. It is not my intention at all. More so my intention is to discuss. If I were to be lecturing my friend I would not listen to anything you have to say nor, would I respond to you I would simply just talk and expect you to listen to only me. Since that is not the case... My response..

Wars are fought for a great many of strange reasons to be completely honest. Yes many times you are correct they seem that they are fought over land and resource but, in reality it is not so much the land or resource for which they fight. It is really over, the desire for someone whom wishes to lord over it, and hoard it from others instead of choosing to instead find ways to work in cooperation. Today wars are often fought for profits of the war machine created to fight them. If we no longer war this industry becomes useless and they fear this demise more than the demise and destruction of many of our youth. They believe the sacrifice of their blood is worth the profits that roll in because of it.




In order to rally people, governments need enemies. They want us to be afraid, to hate, so we will rally behind them. And if they do not have a real enemy, they will invent one in order to mobilize us.
Thich Nhat Hanh




When the tyrant has disposed of foreign enemies by conquest or treaty, and there is nothing more to fear from them, then he is always stirring up some war or other, in order that the people may require a leader.
Plato


There is more than just fighting over land and resource going on here and it has been known for a very long time. Though it seems many have forgotten or never learned.
War is a juvenile ritualized act of our species which, I believe we will grow out of one day if we do not destroy ourselves in the process.



You are obviously not well versed in your own countries history.
The United States Constitution was forged on the battle grounds of the War for Independence.
Strengthened during the war between the states and came of age during WWI and WWII.
Do you suppose there were any advanced methods of interrogations during those growing pains of your great democracy.


There was much torture throughout the process and obviously sadly today there still is. The point of these laws against torture though my friend is to progress beyond that barbarism. I disagree with your view of history in some ways but, I see no reason to split hairs over the past. The interesting thing about history is each person seems to relate to it in their own way. We honestly, really have no way of knowing what really happened.
History is written only by the "victor" so what we really end up with is a one sided "His Story" at best. I consider most of what is taught as history a half truth if even that.




Like I said enjoy your freedom and remember those who fought to preserve it and those who continue to guarantee it...


I take nothing away from soldiers. They do sacrifice themselves for what they believe in even if I disagree with the cause (war) I do respect one whom is willing to give their life for something. Now where I disagree with you is that the only way to be free or maintain it is through war.



even those who sometimes have to do hard lifting so you can live in self-righteousness while the Jews(NAZI's), Kurds (Saddam) are being gassed or women are being mutilated by the Taliban.


The path of non-violence does the hard lifting in another way. Instead of with physical force it is done with the force of the soul. I take nothing away from the soldier with the path of non-violence other than the need for them to go die in someone's war.



I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed... without having first spoke clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today: my own government. For the sake of those boys, for the sake of this government, for the sake of the hundreds of thousands trembling under our violence, I cannot be silent.
Martin Luther King

There was never a good war or a bad peace.
Benjamin Franklin

Dwight D. Eisenhower
Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed.

George McGovern
I'm fed up to the ears with old men dreaming up wars for young men to die in.







 Kaos86
Joined: 3/7/2007
Msg: 109
What would Jack Bauer do?
Posted: 5/9/2009 7:34:58 AM
In theory it all sounds great however in the real world your application of peaceful dissent has worked few times.
In the last century alone there were many lopsided barbarous acts which led to millions being slaughtered.
All of the people you quote never faced the murderous onslaught of these populations;

Bosnia-Herzegovina: 1992-1995 - 200,000 Deaths
Rwanda: 1994 - 800,000 Deaths
Pol Pot in Cambodia: 1975-1979 - 2,000,000 Deaths
Nazi Holocaust: 1938-1945 - 6,000,000 Deaths
Rape of Nanking: 1937-1938 - 300,000 Deaths
Stalin's Forced Famine: 1932-1933 - 7,000,000 Deaths
Armenians in Turkey: 1915-1918 - 1,500,000 Deaths

Also interesting and telling in that you did not quote Jesus Christ.
While Ghandi, was a leader for peaceful demonstration he was also a politician and an opportunist and had the British granted full independence for India(as he requested) he would have endorsed Inadian support of Britain during WWII.

Remember while you slept safe in your bed last night the Taliban were were active setting up human shields and Al qaeda was plotting your death.
But don't fear the CIA and Jack Bauer protect you as best it can with one arm tied behind their back.
 cotter
Joined: 10/17/2005
Msg: 110
view profile
History
What would Jack Bauer do?
Posted: 5/9/2009 10:23:45 AM
I know nothing about the TV show this thread is referring to, but my nephew does and he says he's not on board with everything the character does.


So, in the end, these interrogations and murders changed nothing -
Ya ... that's what they have been reporting. So the torture really was not necessary ... and no one had to break the law ... eh?
 Kaos86
Joined: 3/7/2007
Msg: 113
What would Jack Bauer do?
Posted: 5/19/2009 10:10:40 AM
Well we know what Jack would do.
He would agree with the former Democratic House member and current Obama appointed CIA Director Leon Panetta.
Under insistent questioning from a Senate panel, Mr. Panetta said that in extreme cases, if interrogators were unable to extract critical information from a terrorism suspect, he would seek White House approval for the C.I.A. to use methods that would go beyond those permitted under the new rules.

“If we had a ticking bomb situation, and obviously, whatever was being used I felt was not sufficient, I would not hesitate to go to the president of the United States and request whatever additional authority I would need,” Mr. Panetta said in his nomination hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee.
 cotter
Joined: 10/17/2005
Msg: 114
view profile
History
What would Jack Bauer do?
Posted: 5/19/2009 10:55:37 AM

Under insistent questioning from a Senate panel, Mr. Panetta said that in extreme cases, if interrogators were unable to extract critical information from a terrorism suspect, he would seek White House approval for the C.I.A. to use methods that would go beyond those permitted under the new rules.

“If we had a ticking bomb situation, and obviously, whatever was being used I felt was not sufficient, I would not hesitate to go to the president of the United States and request whatever additional authority I would need,” Mr. Panetta said in his nomination hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee.
Hmmm ... that looks familiar. Ah yes ... you posted that in the other thread in here ...
http://forums.plentyoffish.com/8874198datingPostpage36.aspx ... Message 895.

I'll just post my answer to that here as well ...
AND ... you just assume that (especially what we now know ... how unreliable such information can be) ... that Panetta would just get the nod for that?

You don't think that maybe THIS president would say, "NO"!!!
 Kaos86
Joined: 3/7/2007
Msg: 115
What would Jack Bauer do?
Posted: 5/19/2009 1:04:30 PM
I have no idea whether Obama would grant it or not.
No one at this point does.
However if the question is asked then the possibility exists.
Based on Obama's growing list of Bush policy continuances and endorsements I believe yes there is a good possibility that given similar circumstances the Obama White House would use EIT's.
Pretty soon P. Obama may authorize EIT's on Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi if they don't shut there mouths.
 marita_b
Joined: 6/15/2005
Msg: 116
view profile
History
What would Jack Bauer do?
Posted: 5/20/2009 8:09:55 AM
The difference between a thug and a professional interrogator is a vast one.


this bore repeating and no kidding eh?

sadly todays interrogators were raised on blockbusters and I think some of them believe they are in them,.....

Just like Obama,....who thought that he could actually do all the things he wants to do,...
It's sad when realization hits and the truth rears its ugly head,.....

Jack Bouer is a fictional character,.....
let's not loose sight of that fact please
 Kaos86
Joined: 3/7/2007
Msg: 117
What would Jack Bauer do?
Posted: 5/20/2009 8:36:42 AM

this bore repeating and no kidding eh?

sadly todays interrogators were raised on blockbusters and I think some of them believe they are in them,.....


How would you know this?
How would any civilian know this?
Have you been through military or CIA training.

I doubt that anything the military or CIA does today compares to what what was done 30 or 40 years ago. The treatment of detainees(enemy combatants) I am sure is downright humane compared to what US troops would receive in return and also compared to how the US treated prisoners during past wars.

I love 24 but it is just fiction.
The leftists see it and assume the CIA is all a bunch of Jack Bauers.
 marita_b
Joined: 6/15/2005
Msg: 118
view profile
History
What would Jack Bauer do?
Posted: 5/20/2009 11:24:21 AM
well maybe none of us would know this if some people didn't feel the need to photograph every thing,.....and just for your own information,...yes I have been in the military,...thanks for asking,....

we here don't have the CIA,....so no I haven't been through their respect the detainee course,...and we call ours Canadian Security Intelligence Service or csis for short,...
and FYI I haven't been through any of their courses either but I understand our policy to be signifigantly different,...when we have injured detainees we don't take advantage and poke a finger into the wound or forget to mend them we fix them ,...

the following I found an eye opener,...perhaps you will too inspite of the date of this or better yet because of it,...I found it even more so,....


<div class="quote"> POWs, The Geneva Conventions and the Second Gulf War (March 2003)
By Stephanie Carvin
If a picture speaks a thousand words, the images transmitted around the world in late 2001 of the “unlawful combatants” being transferred to the US detention centre in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, spoke volumes. Blindfolded, handcuffed and strapped to hospital beds, the prisoners looked like they were undergoing some hideous scientific experiment rather than merely being transported to their new prison.

But that was just the beginning of the PR nightmare in which the US government found itself regarding to the prisoners from the ‘war on terror.’ The Bush Administration came under fire for announcing that the captives, were illegal combatants, and therefore did not have any protection under the Geneva Conventions.

The outcry was immediate from NGOs, international organizations and allies who insisted that the United States adhere to the Geneva Conventions to which it was a signatory. All were quick to point out that even if the ‘detainees’ were not classified as Prisoners of War (POWs), they would be protected under the Fourth Geneva convention for the protection of civilians in conflict areas.

******please note this bit******
By late January 2002, US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, under international pressure, acknowledged that the Conventions do apply to all of the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, reversing earlier statements to the contrary.

(**got that,....he said that they... should!!!!! be treated acording to the convention***my added comment)

The moral of this story is that despite the changing face and nature of war, the Geneva Conventions are surprisingly flexible and remain relevant for the protection of all individuals who find themselves embroiled in armed conflict. Even when given seemingly justifiable circumstances to do otherwise, countries continue to profess the importance of the Conventions and their commitment to adhere to them. They do so for the sake of their moral image and for the protection of their own personnel.

It has been over a year since the Guantanamo controversy. However, with the outbreak of war in the Gulf, the Geneva Conventions have again returned to the spotlight.

The Geneva Conventions

There is much confusion over what exactly the Conventions are and whom they protect. The Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the two Additional Protocols of 1977 are the documents that currently outline the humanitarian rules applicable in armed conflict. There are four separate Conventions that govern the treatment of neutral personnel, medical workers, POWs and civilians. Specifically:

Convention I: for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field.
Convention II: for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea.
Convention III: relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War.
Convention IV: relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War.
These four Conventions have been signed by 190 states. The Additional Protocols of 1977 (AP I and II) have been signed by a majority of states, but by substantially fewer than the 1949 Conventions (161 and 156 states respectively of 191 UN member countries).However, they are still considered to have customary, if not moral, authority by many. The purpose of the two Additional Protocols was to clarify and strengthen the protection afforded to individuals, POWs and civilians in armed conflict.

Both the United States and Iraq are parties to the Geneva Conventions. The United States ratified the Conventions on 2 August 1955 and Iraq ascended on 14 February 1956. However, both countries are not signatories to the Additional Protocols of 1977.

The Conventions become applicable at the beginning of hostilities. According to the Conventions, this includes “all cases of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them.” In the case of the present conflict, the Conventions would have become effective when the Coalition Forces began their attack on 18 March 2003, although international law, international humanitarian law and international human rights law would have always been in effect.

Degrading Treatment of POWs

Using prisoners of war for propaganda purposes is a violation of the Geneva Conventions and organizations which monitor compliance of international law, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), have requested that both the Iraqi and Coalition forces refrain from releasing images of POWs to the media. This is, of course, problematic as there are at least a thousand journalists in the region with the ability to send images of POWs all over the world.

The US has made the claim that by “parading” American POWs on television, Iraq has violated Common Article 3 of the Conventions which prohibit “outrages on personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment.” Also, directly relating to this issue, the Conventions specify that “No one shall be subjected to physical or mental torture, corporal punishment or cruel or degrading treatment.” This could also be considered a violation under Article 13 of the Third Convention which states that “prisoners of war must at all times be protected, particularly against acts of violence or intimidation and against insults and public curiosity."

POW status is also governed by Article 4 of the Third Convention. The General principal of this article is that any member of the armed forces of a party to a conflict is a combatant and any combatant captured by the opposing party is a POW.

Finally, as mentioned above, further clarification of POW status is located in Additional Protocols I and II. Specifically, AP II, 4 prohibits “outrages on personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment, enforced prostitution and any form of indecent assault."

Again, neither the US or Iraq are parties to AP I and II. However, this does not mean that the Protocols are not binding upon both Parties. The Geneva Conventions specify that in cases not covered by the Conventions, the Protocols or other international agreements, or in the case of denunciation of these agreements, “civilians and combatants remain under the protection and authority of the principles of international law derived from established custom, from the principles of humanity and from the dictates of public conscience.” This, the so-called Martens Clause, indicates that the Additional Protocols may be considered customary law and that all parties are morally bound by the rules in them if they truly wish to be seen as adhering to both the letter and the spirit of international law.

Although these rules may sound frivolous or run counter to the imparatives of modern warfare, they are historically significant. In World War II some 200 US and British POWs were forced to march through the streets of Rome and forced to endure insults and other indignities. It is worth noting that the officer who staged the event was later prosecuted as a war criminal.

Irregular Forces

Another issue that may emerge as the Coalition forces make headway into Iraq are the Amn Al-Khas (Special Security Service/Office) and the Fedayeen Saddam (Saddam’s Martyrs/ “Men of Sacrifice”). These are not regular army personnel or members of the Republican Guard Special Forces. Rather, they paramilitary organizations who are fiercely loyal to Saddam and known to operate in plain clothes. By most accounts, they are led by Saddam’s sons. Other groups said to be participating in the fighting include the Al Quds (Jerusalem Brigades) made up of both men and women fighters, Ashbal Saddam (Saddam’s Cubs) – a military organization for children ages 10-16 and the Youth Civil Defence Force whose 12-17 year old members are trained to protect cities. (It is worth noting that enlisting soldiers under the age of 15 is considered to be a war crime.)

In the present conflict, the Al-Khas and Fedayeen have been providing assistance and enforcing loyalty to the regular Iraqi forces in cities like Nasiriyah. According to some reports, these forces fight without a uniforms, identification and/or without openly carrying their arms. In this case, these forces are “illegal combatants” – that is, private persons who do not have the right to take part in the conflict. These individuals may face trial for their participation. If a combatant who is not a member of a recognized armed force wishes to be accorded POW status, he/she must adhere to Article 4 of the Third Convention: 1) to be under the command of a person responsible for his subordinates (part of a hierarchical organized force); 2) having a fixed or distinctive sign recognizable at a distance; 3) carrying arms openly, and; 4) conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war. It is uncertain at this point how well the Al-Khas and Fedayeen have complied with these four requirements.

The exception to this would be if the Al-Khas and Fedayeen are considered to be participating in a levée en masse (a general uprising of the population against an invading force). It is doubtful that the US will regard their participation as a part of such a movement.

However, being designated an ‘illegal combatant’ does not mean that any such individual is not protected under the Conventions. Rather, instead of being given POW status under the Third Convention, they would be protected under the Fourth Convention as civilians.

Compliance with the Conventions

Iraq has declared that it will act in line with the Geneva Conventions – likely out of a desire to maintain a degree of respectability in the eyes of the international community. However, given its past record, it is understandable that many on the Coalition side and international organizations remain concerned. During the Iran-Iraq War of the 1980s, Iraq (as well as Iran) confounded the ICRC’s efforts to identify the deceased and captured POWs and prevented visits to some 20,000 Iranian POWs. Well over a decade since the last shot of that war has been fired, all prisoners have still not been released. During the Gulf War, captured American pilots were beaten while being interrogated by Iraqi forces. If the fighting in Baghdad becomes messy, Saddam’s willingness to abide by the Conventions is questionable at best. If allegations that American POWs were shot while attempting to surrender prove true, this would already be a grave breach of the Geneva Convention.

On the other hand, it is clear that the US and Coalition forces wish to be seen as adhering to international law as much as possible in this conflict. Yet already there has been concern over pictures of Iraqi POWs published in the Western media. On 23 March, the Washington Post published a picture of a bound and blinded Iraqi POW. Iraqi POWs have also been seen during “live-on-the-scene” reporting from the front lines of the conflict.Nevertheless, one can expect that the Coalition forces will attempt as much as possible to maintain the spirit of the international law. Even while it denied that the prisoners in Guantanamo were protected by the Conventions during the war in Afghanistan, spokespersons for the US government and military insisted that all prisoners would be treated along the lines specified under international humanitarian law.

It is clear that the Geneva Conventions are profoundly important to American and Coalition forces. It also appears that Iraq has shown a greater degree of respect for the Convention than in previous wars.Respecting the Conventions is crucial to launching complaints when the rights of one’s own troops are abused. Any time one side in a conflict shows less than full compliance with the rule of law, they have diminished their moral stature and made it easier for their opponents to refuse to comply. It is hoped that the damage done over the rights of prisoners in Afghanistan will not result in a tougher time for Coalition POWs in Iraq. It is in the interest of the of all warring parties to adhere to international humanitarian law at all times.

Stephanie Carvin is the Research Officer of the Canadian Institute of Strategic Studies

Copyright CISS 2003

that can be found on the csis web site,... http://www.ciss.ca/Comment_GulfWarPOWs.htm

It's a simple thing of do unto other's,...hm that sounds familliar I'm sure I'll remember later where that was written in stone,....

If you want your men and women to be treated with respect and descency then try that,.....what could it hurt,...you can allways kick the shit out of them later,....or drown them or whatever get's the lies or the blood flowing better,.....

*****************************************************************************

I doubt that anything the military or CIA does today compares to what what was done 30 or 40 years ago. The treatment of detainees(enemy combatants) I am sure is downright humane compared to what US troops would receive in return and also compared to how the US treated prisoners during past wars.

*****************************************************************************

well you'd be right there,....I knew a lot of vietnam vets in Toronto,...
apparently not just draft dodger's came up north,....and I learned a few things from them,....about how they would make one guy talk by taking him and three of his buddies for a chopper ride,....they got him talking by tossing his buddies one at a time out, .....

sometimes they even took bets on how many buddies had to learn how to fly before talking,...the really tough guys never did,....but there were more where they came from,....

sometimes they rolled up several men together in razzor wire and then roll them down a hill,....

OH YEA!!!!! you've come a long way baby!...you should be so proud!
 cotter
Joined: 10/17/2005
Msg: 119
view profile
History
What would Jack Bauer do?
Posted: 5/20/2009 12:54:56 PM

... about how they would make one guy talk by taking him and three of his buddies for a chopper ride,....they got him talking by tossing his buddies one at a time out, .....

sometimes they even took bets on how many buddies had to learn how to fly before talking,...the really tough guys never did,....but there were more where they came from,....
One of our neighbors was a helicopter pilot in Vietnam back while I was still in high school (went to school with his younger siblings) and I remember when he came home. He told of how awful it was for him to have to pilot those "rides" where not everyone would return.

Back then, it wasn't so easy to refuse to follow orders ... and he said he was just counting the days to get home and not have to do that anymore.

I have just never understood how some can be so sadistic. I've often said (in here as well) those who would condone torture and other such sadistic maneuvers ... I would hope I'd never be part of their lives. They're probably the types that think it's okay to beat a spouse or partner. You know ... if torture is okay, then beating your partner is probably considered foreplay ... eh?
 Kaos86
Joined: 3/7/2007
Msg: 120
What would Jack Bauer do?
Posted: 5/20/2009 1:09:39 PM
No doubt bad things happen thats why they call it War.
btw I have refrenced the CSIS on here or other threads here. In case you did not notice I am Canadian.
It's funny you should bring up your military service although there is no way to prove any ones claimes here all those who serve are to be commended.
If you think the pictures from Gitmo were horrific then I challenge you to watch the torture Daniel Pearl suffered as he had his head cut of by those scum bags, then you tell me what is troture. The torture Jack Buer inflicts is make beleive but the torture the terroists inflict is far to real.
It's amazing what the CIA achieved in such little time and heros for there service.

That being said there is much that we do not know and shouldn't know that keeps us all safe here in North America.
Comparitively speaking the prisoners at Guantanamo are treated far superior to the treatment American and Canadian soldiers would receive from the enemy. Just ask Daniel Pearl or the soldier whose body was dragged through the streets of Mogadishu.
It would be neat if Jack Bauer could round up all the leftists who protest dogs barking and catepilars in boxes and fly them all over to Afghanistan and let you all go there and protest the Taliban and Al Qaeda.
 marita_b
Joined: 6/15/2005
Msg: 121
view profile
History
What would Jack Bauer do?
Posted: 5/21/2009 8:06:35 AM
there is a difference between torture and execution,....

one you are trying to get something, information whatever,....

the second is pure revenge,....and his wife (Daniels)even wondered if the treatment of prisoners of war by the Americans was more appropriate and humane,....would the father of her boy not have had to grow up without his father,....either

I agree with her BTW,....and no I don't need to see the graphic details from either side,...for me the descriptions are bad enough,...thanks,....

You are also correct that I can't prove I was in the military,....but then neither can you!...your point being?,.....BTW,....Daniel wasn't a soldier,...you knew that though right?
 marita_b
Joined: 6/15/2005
Msg: 123
view profile
History
What would Jack Bauer do?
Posted: 5/22/2009 11:59:49 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lvsvO9kvSdo

It doesn't happen in the real world. It is a myth created to try to justify the unjustifiable dont believe me listen to man who spent decades in the business of interrogation.

Here is more of what real interrogators do...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=biGRQY67VOA&feature=channel


Thank you kabiosile, for those references,....
These interviews reenforce the opinion of many of us that torture never saved anyone,....

It does bring this thought of mine to the foreground,....that being how many average citizens walking about believe torture is just fine,.... "as long as it's us torturing them"

These interviews also agree with many of us that waterboarding isn't required to get the truth you are after and it onece and for all squashes that idiotic notion,...what if there was a ticking bomb,....


They knew the attack was coming before it happened. It was not the intelligence department that failed the US it was the administration for not taking it seriously. Torture would not have helped anyone on 911 either.


and if you think that no one could ever have emagined such a thing,....

then check out this clip,.....It was the pilot episode of the x-files spin off series THE LONE GUNMEN,.....

http://video.google.ca/videosearch?hl=en&q=The+Lone+Gunmen.+pilot+episode&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=SPQWSrCKFcygmAezweHYDA&sa=X&oi=video_result_group&resnum=4&ct=title#

you might even think that the hijackers'got their ideadirectly from this episode which BTW was aired six months before the towers fell,....





 Kaos86
Joined: 3/7/2007
Msg: 124
What would Jack Bauer do?
Posted: 5/22/2009 5:32:50 PM
The ticking time bomb as portrayed regularly on the TV show "24" does indeed occur in real life.

United Airlines Flight 93 was a scheduled United States domestic passenger flight from Newark International Airport, in Newark, New Jersey, to San Francisco International Airport, in San Francisco, California that was hijacked by four Islamic terrorists as part of the September 11 attacks in 2001. Over forty minutes into the flight the hijackers breached the c ockpit, overpowered the pilots, and took over the control of the aircraft, diverting it toward Washington, D.C. Several passengers and crew members made telephone calls aboard the flight and learned about the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. As a result, the passengers decided to mount an assault against the hijackers and gain control of the aircraft.
The plane crashed in a field in Stonycreek Township, near Shanksville, in Somerset County, Pennsylvania, about 80 miles (130 km) southeast of Pittsburgh and 150 miles (240 km) northwest of Washington, D.C., killing all on board including 40 passengers and crew and four hijackers. Many witnessed the impact from the ground and news agencies began reporting on the event within an hour. The plane fragmented upon impact, leaving a crater, and some debris was blown miles from the crash site. The remains of everyone on board the aircraft were later identified. Subsequent analysis of the flight recorders revealed how the actions taken by the passengers prevented the aircraft from reaching the hijackers' intended target, thought to be either the White House or United States Capitol. A permanent memorial is planned for construction on the crash site. The chosen design has been the subject of criticism, but the memorial is scheduled to be dedicated in 2011.
Wikipedia

Many on the flight had made calls to loved ones and learned of the terrorist attack in New York and Washington on that day.
Clearly the ticking time bomb(there plane) prompted the heroes aboard flight 93 to action.
No telling how many other lives they saved had the terrorists not been thwarted in their plans.
 marita_b
Joined: 6/15/2005
Msg: 125
view profile
History
What would Jack Bauer do?
Posted: 5/23/2009 11:01:04 PM
You are straying from the main posting idea,...but,....

Even a Jack Bouer TYPE,....were there such a thing (and the real spies will tell you there isn't),...
he couldn't have done anything other than watch the action on TV, unless if by sheer hapenstance,....he were one of the passengers,....

and there is no point re hashing what happened that day here,....again and again
I suspect we have all seen the footage of everything that happened that day hundrreds of times ,.....enough already,....please!

The point here being A Jack Bouer would have been as helpless as all other policing , & military agents,...all any of them could do was look up,....
 Kaos86
Joined: 3/7/2007
Msg: 126
What would Jack Bauer do?
Posted: 5/24/2009 7:34:46 AM
You mean Jack Bauer is not real.... Wow my bubble is busted.
There is every point in rehashing what happened that day!
That is what has driven this forum and many others on here since that day.
It is exactly the point.
The ticking time bomb those heroes (passengers) faced that day was exactly what drives the TV show "24".
Fictional characters are always an exaggeration of real life events however those Heroes (passengers) were the real Jack Bauers.
Those passengers were not helpless when they fought back against the hi-jackers that morning.

To say "enough please" is a disservice to their memory and courage.
Some don't even have the courage to recognize the heroics of that day.
 marita_b
Joined: 6/15/2005
Msg: 127
view profile
History
What would Jack Bauer do?
Posted: 5/24/2009 5:50:20 PM

To say "enough please" is a disservice to their memory and courage.
Some don't even have the courage to recognize the heroics of that day


You know,...I actually thought about that, and I appreciate how that might be offensive to many,...which was and is not my intent,....

and I have to say my timing couldn't have been worse,....realizing too late that our neighbours to the south are celeblrating, memorial day tomorrow,....( my bad,...I appologize for that)

I was goint to get into why I said what I did,....which had a very solid comparratieve base, but out of respect for the long week-end,...
however,.....I have decided not to dig myself in deeper,....

I appologize
 Kaos86
Joined: 3/7/2007
Msg: 128
What would Jack Bauer do?
Posted: 5/24/2009 6:13:32 PM
Accepted however the US Memorial Day really doesn't have anything to do with the Heroes of Flight 93.
They knew what the intention of the Terrorists were(Ticking Time Bomb Scenario) they chose to over power the thugs and saved many others on the ground.
After 911 there was much chatter regarding future attacks. The Bush Administration acted upon this intelligence and did what they had to do to protect America and Canada also.

"24" and Jack Bauer take this theme to the extreme no one believes for a second that a jack Bauer character actually exists anymore than does George Costanza. They are caricatures.
I am glad you were able to swallow your ideology and admit a truth.
 marita_b
Joined: 6/15/2005
Msg: 129
view profile
History
What would Jack Bauer do?
Posted: 5/26/2009 12:28:48 PM

no one believes for a second that a jack Bauer character actually exists[/quote

you haven't actually read all of the pages and pages of statements,....have you?

what do you mean Geoge Costanza doesn't exist,.....

bt the way,....I admit nothing,.....
 whiskeypapa
Joined: 5/19/2008
Msg: 131
What would Jack Bauer do?
Posted: 2/13/2013 1:26:22 PM
No Navy seal shot Bin Laden. Bin Laden died of pulmonary complications bought on by kidney failure in December of 2001. He is buried in an unmarked grave in ToraBora.
 00Spy
Joined: 4/13/2013
Msg: 133
What would Jack Bauer do?
Posted: 10/1/2013 4:07:33 PM
Jack Bauer would shoot Obama in the knee caps then lock him in a room with Harry Reed, John Boehner and Ted Cruz until a deal was reached!
Show ALL Forums  > Current Events  >