Pentagon has Lost it's Mind
One Angry Christian
Could someone PLEASE explain to me how terrorists in ANY WAY fit what the Geneva convention describes as a military combatant. Here are the definitions as set up by the Geneva Convention that all the liberals keep claiming describe the
A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy:
1. Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.
2. Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfill the following conditions:
(a) That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
(b) That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;
(c) That of carrying arms openly;
(d) That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.
Terrorists are NOT covered by the Geneva Convention in any way shape or form. They are not contractors. They are not civilians. They are militias. They do NOT wear a uniform or any sort of emblem, and they do NOT abide by the rules of war. They are NOT military combatants. They are terrorists, and they should be either shot on sight or questioned and THEN shot.
What part of "NOT a member of ANY military" does the Pentagon NOT get? How many college graduate military people does it take to decipher something so damned simple?
-One Angry Christian