American Hero being Persecuted by Pentagon

Being in the military let me say.

He violated the Geneva Convention and will be punished as appropriate.

Article 17
Every prisoner of war, when questioned on the subject, is bound to give only his surname, first names and rank, date of birth, and army, regimental, personal or serial number, or failing this, equivalent information.

If he wilfully infringes this rule, he may render himself liable to a restriction of the privileges accorded to his rank or status.

Each Party to a conflict is required to furnish the persons under its jurisdiction who are liable to become prisoners of war, with an identity card showing the owner's surname, first names, rank, army, regimental, personal or serial number or equivalent information, and date of birth. The identity card may, furthermore, bear the signature or the fingerprints, or both, of the owner, and may bear, as well, any other information the Party to the conflict may wish to add concerning persons belonging to its armed forces. AS far as possible the card shall measure 6.5 x 10 cm. and shall be issued in duplicate. The identity card shall be shown by the prisoner of war upon demand, but may in no case be taken away from him.

No physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion, may be inflicted on prisoners of war to secure from them information of any kind whatever. Prisoners of war who refuse to answer may not be threatened, insulted, or exposed to any unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment of any kind.
Prisoners of war who, owing to their physical or mental condition, are unable to state their identity, shall be handed over to the medical service. The identity of such prisoners shall be established by all possible means, subject to the provisions of the preceding paragraph.

The questioning of prisoners of war shall be carried out in a language which they understand.

 

From the article above:

Terrorists don't play by the rules of the Geneva Convention. Actually, neither did the North Vietnamese or North Koreans and neither do any of the Islamic jihadists. Guess the rules only apply to America.

This poor military career soldier of 20 years' service is being sacrificed on the alter of political correctness and will lose his benefits.

Oh, that's right, the Administration just cut benefits to veterans, so that doesn't matter. (sarcasm intended)

 

I certainly hope we can do better than terrorists. We are a nation of laws, and if the colonel broke the law, then he must be held accountable.

Torture is a slippery slope, and condoning mild forms of torture such as psychological abuse, will surely lead to more horrible types. There have to be rules, and they have to be obeyed. Soldiers understand this, or should.

 

I dont know what you dont understand about Article 17, coercion is a pretty simple concept. I am sure the Col. knew what he was doing was coercing the individual to cooperate. I think he said he knew what he was doing and would take resposibility for his acts. So lets just see what will be the outcome before we decide to make this an issue. Like I said I am in the military and no we do not eat our own. So I would say that Col. West will never make general but he wont be forced to retire either. I am sure that is what he meant by he would take responsiblity for his action. He knew at that point his action would end any chances for promotion.

No, the enemy does not play by the rules. That in no way would give us the moral authority to disregard a treaty which we signed. All I was pointing out is that he did violate the Laws of armed conflict and if we just sweep it under then we loose what little support that we have from other nations.

 

Actually, a slight correction is in order here. America is not the only country that follows these rules. So does Israel, exceept they are more strict than America is with the rules. I am sure there are other countries as well, but Israel is the only other one I know about.

Joseph Botwinick

 

If the US govt didn't mean for this article to apply during wartime, then the US govt shouldn't have enacted or signed on to it. The articles only exist BECAUSE of wartime violations. Your attitude is like saying, "Here are the rules we agree to play football with. We'll observe them, except when we play football."

The case is a clear violation of the convention. And we signed on to it, and even Bush and Powell stated publicly that they expected Iraq to abide by it, if they had captured US soldiers.

And saying "yeah, but they do it too" is not a defense. If it were, then we could justify all kinds of heinous acts.

Which means that we are no better than the enemy - in which case, there is no "American democratic ideal" left that is worth fighting for. We would be surrendering that ideal whenever obeying the ideal became inconvenient - that's not an ideal at all.

 

Actually, a slight correction is in order here. America is not the only country that follows these rules. So does Israel, exceept they are more strict than America is with the rules. I am sure there are other countries as well, but Israel is the only other one I know about.

Joseph Botwinick </font>[/QUOTE]Unfortunately, Israel does not follow those rules. That's why Israel gets mentioned each year by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch as a frequent violator. In fact, even the US State Dept. put Israel on its list of offenders for the current year.

A little more truth and a little less propaganda, Joseph.

 

A little less anti-semitic propaganda would be great, TBT. They are mentioned by these groups because they are pro-terrorist and anti-semitic. There is very little truth in the accusations that they make. I don't have time to argue it with you, but if you are interested in the truth, read Dershowitz's new book, "The Case for Israel".

Joseph Botwinick

 

"Ideals" look great on paper and off plitical lips. I assure you, in war conditions, things change, and all sides violate these rules from time to time. It happened in WWII and it happened in Korea....I am certain it happens in every conflict. You just don't know until you have been there, my friends.

Cheers,

Jim, Captain, B179755.....name, rank and serial number,,,the only information required by the Geneva Convention

 

I noticed that Joseph didn't diss your U.S. State Department statement - and for good reason - based on a report by the Bush administration that Joseph supports strongly. It looks like you are totally correct on this issue concerning Israel, TBT:

Israeli and international human rights organizations continued to report an increase in the number of allegations that security forces tortured detainees, including using abusive methods prohibited in a September 1999 High Court decision. There also were numerous allegations that police officers beat detainees. Detention and prison conditions for Palestinian security detainees held in Israel were poor and did not meet international standards regarding the provision of sufficient living space, food, and access to medical care. During the year, the Government detained without charge thousands of persons in Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza. Some security prisoners were sentenced on the basis of coerced confessions by both themselves and others. According to human rights organizations, the legal system often imposed more severe punishments on Arab citizens than on Jewish citizens, although such discrepancies were not provided by law.

The Government interfered with individual privacy in some instances. The Government imposed severe restrictions on the movement of persons and some restrictions on the movement of goods between Israel and the West Bank and Gaza as well as between cities in the West Bank and Gaza. Also known as "closure," this practice has been in effect to varying extents since 1993 (see Section 2.d. of the annex). The Government claimed that the closures were necessary to prevent terrorism. Discrimination and societal violence against women persisted, although the Government continued to take steps to address these problems. Discrimination against persons with disabilities persisted. The Government did little to reduce institutional, legal, and societal discrimination against the country's Arab citizens, who constituted approximately 20 percent of the population but did not share fully the rights and benefits provided to, and obligations imposed on, the country's Jewish citizens. Trafficking in women for the purpose of forced prostitution was a continuing problem. Israel was invited by the Community of Democracies' (CD) Convening Group to attend the November 2002 second CD Ministerial Meeting in Seoul, Republic of Korea, as a participant.

- More at www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2002/18278.htm

 

Where is President Bush in this? Can't he speak up for this brave man? I notice that Mr. Bush has the habit of being MIA when it comes to standing up for those whom he should be vocally supporting.

 

Could cost votes. The liberals wouldn't like it, but the "conservatives" will vote for him no matter what. So, be a liberal and get re-elected.

 

No anti-semitism here, Joseph. Just because someone doesn't swallow the same line you do; well, that does not make them anti-semitic. Opposing Israeli policies is not the same thing as anti-semitism, no matter how much the right-wing in Israel tries to blur the distinction.

Wrong. Israel is mentioned by these groups, because of the actions and atrocities carried out by Israel.

Whenever you encounter someone who points out the flaws in Israeli policy, you may have a knee-jerk reaction to just label them all as "pro-terrorist", but that's not factually accurate.

Wrong again. Their observations are both accurate, as well as supported by other observer groups - even some of which are Israeli. In addition, the EXACT SAME STATEMENTS are supported by our own State Dept, even under a very pro-Israeli Bush Administration.

So your charge of "anti-semitic" and "pro-terrorist" are exposed as nothing but two buckets of hogwash.

Of course you don't.

 

A very debatable statement. Fodder for another thread.