How Has Our Military Been Able To Comply With Common Article 3 In The Past

[ThomWV]

Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions became effective 12 August 1949. Soon thereafter this country entered into active conflict in the Korean War (June 25, 1950 - July 27, 1953) and fought the Viet Nam War (circa 1959 - April 30, 1975), participated in invasions of small countries over two decades, and then entered into the first Gulf War (1990 - 1991).

In each of the major conflicts in which we have engaged under international law as proscribed the the Geneva Conventions we have managed to do so without further clarification of Common Article 3. It is not much of a tribute to our armed services that they have managed to comply with treaty and international law because not only is that expected of them but in fact Common Article 3 is such a simply document that understanding it requires no further guidance.

You can read Common Article 3 in its entirety at this URL: http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/WebART/375-590006?OpenDocument

As you can see, it is clear and concise. Understanding it is not outside the grasp of a reasonable and normal literate person. Graduates of our military Academies or college Reserve Officer Training Programs or Officer's Candidate Schools should have no problem with it.

So why is a law required to clarify Common Article 3 now? I reject the proposition that our military, which has successfully complied with Common Article 3 for 57 years can not do so today. There has been no technological advance with has rendered the Article obsolete, no lowering of the qualifications of our military's leadership.

[wakeme2008]

1. This line is very clear to this Vietnam Vet

(a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;

[subterranean]

2. Why is a law required to clarify Common Article 3?

Because George W. Bush doesn't know the meaning of "personal dignity."

[Jim__]

3. Because we have to make it very clear to everyone ...

... that Common Article 3 doesn't say what it says.

[flordehinojos]

7. because ...

GEORGE "THE DEVIL" WANTS AN OKAY TO KILL AND MUTILATE... they were cutting on someone's penis and making it bleed as a way of making him talk after they took him prisoner for SUSPICIONS of his connections to terrorism. the guy was eventually freed. he talked about how he was tortured on Democracy NOw with Amy Goodman. and Chrissy Matthews wants for the U>S> to okay that kind of behavior so that he and georgie can have their thrills.

:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

[Realityhack]

4. Because...

we used to pretend we where going to not violate it whereas now we want to make that violation official policy.

Seriously we violated it plenty of times in the past. We just didn't 'clarify' it out of existance first. We accepted that we knew what it meant and quietly ignored it when it wasn't convinient.

[endarkenment]

5. Not clear that we did follow it in vietnam.

Then again the North Vietnamese didn't abide by it either. Last I heard, tossing prisoners out of helicopters was not exactly abiding by the letter of the law.

"Among the substantiated cases in the archive:

Seven massacres from 1967 through 1971 in which at least 137 civilians died.

Seventy-eight other attacks on noncombatants in which at least 57 were killed, 56 wounded and 15 sexually assaulted.

One hundred forty-one instances in which U.S. soldiers tortured civilian detainees or prisoners of war with fists, sticks, bats, water or electric shock."

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/080606Y.shtml

A major difference is that we did not have an executive branch demanding that these practices be made legal and that the GC was a quaint artifact of a bygone era. Instead such procedures were kept beneath the radar, covered up, denied. In the past we knew the difference between right and wrong.

[ShortnFiery]

6. Though Manuals like for the ARMY ---> FM 34-52

Army Field Manual 34-52 entitled "Intelligence Interrogations" (UNCLASSIFIED):wow:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/library/policy/army/fm/fm34-52/

provides detailed guidance how to screen, separate, move back from the front, process and interrogate Prisoners. Your CLARIFICATION is within this and other Government Published Manuals (for AF, Navy etc).

[dkofos]

8. It was always easy for them to comply

It wasn't until bUSHCO had to cover his ASS that it became a problem.

[Richardo]

9. Pretty incredible - you and I are on the same page, Thom.

I posted this last night (I also posted it on a RW blog I know) and we make almost identical points :patriot:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2175726&mesg_id=2175726