[mdlug-discuss] [mdlug] OT - IR jamming

[Raymond Ingles]

On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 7:59 PM, allen <amajorov at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> Ingles, Raymond wrote:
>  >  Of course, there's Article 5 of the Geneva Convention. It's pretty short and
>  > unambiguous. Here's the entire thing:
[...]
>  >  That last part, the "competent tribunal" stuff - that's what the U.S. has
>  > avoided doing for, oh, about five years now.

>  Article 5 may be short but it's hardly unambiguous. If there were no
>  doubt about the meaning of the article there wouldn't be any necessity
>  to refer to another article, Article 4, to define what isn't defined in
>  Article 5.

 For legalese it's almost amazingly pellucid, and there's a difference
between 'ambiguous' and 'technical'. Sections of RFCs refer to other
terms and sections of the documents, for example, but that doesn't
mean that they are therefore ambiguous. I've been able to implement a
working FTP client just from reading the RFC, for example.

>  About that "competent tribunal" provision, that only applies "Should any
>  doubt arise". If it's clear that a captured combatant doesn't fall under
>  the definition of a prisoner of war as described, no tribunal is necessary.

 The majority of people in Guantanamo were *not* captured by U.S.
troops - they were turned in by others for reward money or other
considerations. That's where the doubt comes in. And Aaron has stated
specifically that people nearby when an IED goes off are routinely
picked up on suspicion. But there hasn't been any legal scheme for
handling them until very very recently.

 But even at that point, torture shouldn't be the default, go-to
tactic. It should be used carefully and judiciously, when needed,
because there needs to be a clear difference between us and them - not
just in degree, but in kind. And I think our administration and our
soldiers are capable of living up to that standard. (It's not really
clear to me that the current administration has, in fact, done so.
They've shown a rather surprising disregard for the law at home; I'm
dubious about their behavior when oversight's difficult.)

 The treatment of detainees has so far been managed with stupefying
incompetence in many cases. Abu Ghraib, Dilawar, Spc. Baker - look 'em
up. Without clear limits people in guard positions will do brutal
things. This is human nature - look up the Stanford prison experiment.
The U.S. treats prisoners better than a Soviet gulag or Saddam's
torture chambers, sure - but that's an awfully low bar to get over.
Simply for propaganda purposes, we should be different in kind and not
just degree.