Quote:
Originally Posted by Talvenada
ANGRY:
Lib is short for liberal, and not libertarian. You highlight Conse 'Pub, but you're not a Conse 'Pub. You are more right of them: the extreme right.
If YOUR definition of torture is correct, why does international law & The Geneva Convention outlaw waterboarding? Why has America prosecuted people over this?
In other words, waterboarding violates The Geneva Convention, but--in your opinion--is not torture when applied to enemy combatants.
TAL
|
You said I was one of these "Conse 'Pubs. Then I said I was a Libertarian. Then you said that I was a "Lib" and implied that there was something humurous about my party affiliation and just now implied that I am a radical of sorts by saying that I am to "the extreme right".
Quit twisting my words around.
And Tal, The Geneva Conventions specifically states what the defining marks of an enemy combatant are and who may be covered by the Geneva Convention.
As I stated in my earlier post, that as terrorists and not soldiers, they are not afforded Geneva Convention Rights. No uniforms, no insignia, no overt state endorsement, and no differentiation between civilian & military targets.
If they were identified as soldiers with the Iraqi Republican Guard or something, it would be entirely different.