Operation Just Detainment

Operation “Just” Detainment

“…Common Article 3 of Geneva does not apply to either Al Qaeda or Taliaban detainees, because, among other reasons, the relevant conflicts are international in scope and Common Article 3 applies only to вЂ?armed conflict not of an international character,вЂ™Ð²Ð‚Ñœ stated President George W. Bush in a memo in 2002. It is the policy of this nation “… to treat detainees humanly and, to the extent appropriate and consistent with military necessity, in a manner consistent with the principles of Geneva,” President Bush emphasized. There are just as strong opposing thoughts on the detainees but the bottom line is. The detainees being held in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba should be considered terrorists and should not be labeled POW’s thus giving them no rights under the Geneva Conventions (1949).

First off, I feel it necessary to state the proper names by which a detainee may be labeled. These terms are not stated explicitly in the Geneva Conventions (1949). They can labeled one of three things EPW (enemy prisoner of war), civilian internee, armed forces, navel forces. The labeling of the “suspected terrorists” has provoked many arguments up to now and as to what rights should they be afforded under the Geneva laws. Many believe strongly that the detainees have every right given to them under the Geneva Act and should be treated as a POW. While many others including our president to the stand to say that they cannot be considered a POW and they should not be afforded those same rights. “Neither group (Al-Qaeda or Taliban) fought for a recognized government, and al Qaeda fighters satisfied virtually none of the standard criteria associated with soldiers. The Bush administrations decision not to designate the detainees as POWs is thus understandable” (Woodward 3). They do not fight under a law abiding unified government of any sort nor do they respect the “laws of war” set forth in the Geneva Conventions (1949). How ever, they should be treated somewhat decent.

The task of labeling these detainees would not be such a big issue if the type of detainee in which we are in custody of was not a factor in how they were treated. As an actual POW there are only three things to which you are required to give. Those are name, rank, date of birth, army or regiment number (or equivalent information). They cannot be forced to speak past that under any condition. With this “new” type of war, war on terror, “al-Qaida and Taliban are part of an ongoing terrorist conspiracy, and need to be questioned. Al-Qaida’s loose structure may mean that few individuals members will have much information, but many will have lots of seemingly uninteresting scraps to tell, which properly collated and analyzed could be of immense value. Until they are interrogated, we will not know” (Apostolou). The opposing side of this argument is for the respectable and decent treatment of the detainees as POW’s for the sake of our own U.S. soldiers. They feel that if we do not afford them the rights then when we (U.S. soldiers) are taken hostage or detained that they will be punished and possibly punished deadly.

We already know that terrorists do not fight fair. A terrorists “job” is to kill, injure, and cause as much destruction as possible. All the while giving up their life in the process. We also know of the many horrendous acts that have been committed against “our” own. These next examples are from an excerpt from an article by former aide to the U.S. national security advisor, Oliver North.

“On March 16, 1984, CIA Station Chief William Buckley was abducted and then tortured to death in a Beirut dungeon. I carried the agonizing photographs and tape recordings of his brutal beatings back to CIA Director William J Casey. No Islamic leaders condemned the kidnapping and murder. The US media rationalized his treatment as the consequence of being a CIA employee.

On May 28th, 1985, David Jacobson, the Administrator of the American University Hospital in Beirut, where most of the people treated were Muslims, was taken hostage on his way to work. No Islamic leaders denounced the perpetrators. After Jacobson’s release in November 1986, his 18 months of torture were ignored by US media more intent on castigating the Reagan administration for an “Arms for Hostages Deal” then in punishing his captors. The same situation applied for all other Beirut hostages.

On Feb 17,1988 Marine Col. William Higgins was kidnapped and subsequently murdered in Lebanon. Though the United Nations filed a complaint that one of their observers had been “taken”, Islamic leaders were again unheard. When Col Higgins remains were finally recovered in 1991, the silence of the US media was deafening.

By 21 Feb 2002, when Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl was butchered in Pakistan, the Jihadists had moved to a new level. Photographs and audio tapes were deemed inadequate to depict the horror they intended to show us вЂ" and their adherents. Daniel Pearls murderers held him for a week вЂ" while they plotted his brutal murder вЂ" in front of a video camera. An while Islamic leaders were once again mute вЂ" this time the US media responded to the horror. Daniel Pearl was, after all, one of their own. The European press seized on this aspect of the atrocity and decried the heinous act as “an attack on the freedom of the press.” That Daniel Pearl was a Jewish American was hardly mentioned.

On 31 March 2004, just prior to my 3rd trip to Iraq, 4 American civilians, escorting a shipment of food and medicine were ambushed, shot, mutilated and dragged through the streets of Fallujah before their bodies were burned and hung from a bridge over the Euphrates River. The US media pointed out that the security contractors should have known better than to drive through a city where the US was so highly resented. No Islamic leader rose to condemn the atrocity.

Now we have the horrific, video taped murder of an American civilian, 26 year old Nick Berg. The perpetrators

...