The Canadian discussion over our treatment of prisoners in Afghanistan begins.
On the use of flex-cuffs: ho-hum
On the use of hoods during transport: Unnecessary and it will damage our standing.
On the use of the phrase
….since that the Afghan mission is a peacekeeping operation, any prisoners taken by Canadian troops are not subject to the convention.
What sort of asinine statement is that for us to be making? That sort of stupidity is going to accomplish nothing more than getting us lumped in with other countries involved in foreign conflicts trying to claim that the Geneva Convention doesn’t apply for {insert reason of choice for thinking you are the completely legitimate exception} - and we know how they are viewed now don’t we? Their credibility is in the crapper and I don’t want me and mine to be sharing turd space with them.
On the use of the phrase
“The Canadian Forces military police and the Canadian Forces in general do subscribe to the Geneva Convention and we do think they are important and that detainees should be treated in accordance with them,”
Generally ain’t good enough, the law, international or otherwise, is the law. We are a party to the Geneva Conventions and it is our duty to follow them - full stop, end of story, anything less is wrong.
You obviously have a poor understanding of the Geneva Convention, because it does not apply. It only applies to uniformed military, in representation of a state, which these people are not.
The Geneva Convention also only applies to nations which are mutual signatories. The last time I checked, “Islamic Jihad” is not the signatory of the Geneva Convention.
I don’t have to put some lame excuse on it. It’s just legal fact.