Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
BruSan, have you ever read the Convention Against Torture, or the Convention on the Rights of the Child?
Nope, I never have. Do I need to?
I'm once again, not of the crowd that feels this lad was mistreated under the definitions of any humanitarian conventions, regardless of Canada's being a signatore of any of them, and could care less about HIS particular case.
All of this discussion over what Canada's obligations are vis-a-vis what I believe they should be in this particular case is pointless, don't you think.
You and I are never going to be of like minds in this issue as I think, had the little chit gotten his just dues; he'd have been given a martyr's funeral over there and forgotten about by now. Just another misguided young person, who akin to driving while texting, engaged in an act of stupid risk and paid the ultimate price.
Wasting taxpayer-funded governement resources over misguided angst about his perceived mistreatment is, of course, the politically correct, hand wringing, how dare they, thing to do and I simply disagree with that.
Terrorist is a loaded term and very subjective. The actual goal of the "mission" was for Dick Cheney to secure Afghanistan so he could build a pipeline from Russia's oilfields. You have been drinking the Kool-Aid, jambo101. Nobody in Afghanistan wants to "destroy western culture and values." Do you also buy the whole "they hate us for our freedom" b.s.?
Oh for heaven's sake; that is another issue entirely! Now we've moved from what was supposed to be a discussion on the U.S. monitoring email and cel-phone traffic through a misguided younsters folly to the legitimacy of a military incursion in a foreign country......
Scatter-gunning the landscape in an attempt to hit the soft spot of your prey is a very ineffective method of hunting small and insignificant rodents.
Despite the fact Dick Cheney is an azzzhole of the first order; of what import does that have for today's discussion other than to add unnecessarily to the dung heap out back, behind the barn?
Tomorrow should be your concern. Yesterday has already been consigned to history.
Also, someone is either a juvenile or not. Any actions they take as a juvenile cannot strip them of their status as a juvenile. Under Canadian law someone under 16 years of age can never be tried as an adult. That being said, this kid didn't even get a fair trial, plus he was held for a decade in a prison camp/torture camp by the U.S. government. And I, for one, can't fault him for fighting against a foreign occupier. While I don't condone any violence, are you really trying to suggest that people are supposed to sit idly by while their lands are invaded by foreign troops?
This argument makes zero sense.
If, as you argue, he is protected as a Canadian citizen, how can his lands be occupied by foreign troops - bearing in mind that Canada was a military ally of the USA in Afghanistan. Either he is defending his homeland from foreign incursion or he is a foreigner fighting his own countrymen. And that, of course, is treason.
And, to back up slightly:
Regarding the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which was brought up earlier, it does state that those aged 15 to 18 may voluntarily take part in armed conflicts, but cannot be forced to do so - the state must also take feasible measures to ensure that those below 18 aren't fighting, though there's not an outright ban. The Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflicts takes that somewhat further by stating that guerrilla and non-state sponsored forces cannot recruit those below age 18, at all.
Both treaties deal with recruitment into armed forces rather than engagement with them (and do not deal with prisoners of war, at all). Further to that, the Rights of the Child treaty technically allows Khadr to be involved as a fully adult soldier. Khadr's comrades-in-arms, by my reading, acted contrary to the Optional Protocols (as I am under the impression they were a guerrilla militia).
All this adds up to some interesting questions:
Does Khadr's waiving of his non-military service right waive his other rights as well?
Does the voluntary nature of his service override the non-state clause of the Optional Protocols?
I would be inclined to answer yes, to both questions. Of course, that doesn't justify any torture or inhumane treatment in Guantanamo, but after reading through the international treaties, his age seems a moot point.
Terrorist is a loaded term and very subjective. The actual goal of the "mission" was for Dick Cheney to secure Afghanistan so he could build a pipeline from Russia's oilfields. You have been drinking the Kool-Aid, jambo101. Nobody in Afghanistan wants to "destroy western culture and values." Do you also buy the whole "they hate us for our freedom" b.s.?
Tarp you think it was all about a Russian pipeline? You cant be serious..
let me refresh your memory
A minor cannot voluntarily waive rights under the convention.
Did you go to law school?
The convention states explicitly that a minor can volunteer for military service and that a signatory state can accept that service. The state must take all feasible measures to ensure the child does not engage in direct military action. Can we reasonably expect that a 15 year old who volunteers for military service will retain their right to parental care, freedom of expression or freedom from corporal punishment, or is the voluntary service a waiving of those rights, for the duration of their service?
The convention states explicitly that a minor can volunteer for military service and that a signatory state can accept that service. The state must take all feasible measures to ensure the child does not engage in direct military action. Can we reasonably expect that a 15 year old who volunteers for military service will retain their right to parental care, freedom of expression or freedom from corporal punishment, or is the voluntary service a waiving of those rights, for the duration of their service?
International law states that you never lose your right to due process, no matter what the circumstances. Even the Nazis who killed hundreds of thousands of people were allowed a hearing at the Nuremburg Trials. Even Osama Bin Laden technically deserved due process, instead of being promptly killed.
It is against international law to hold detainees without charges, and without a hearing, indefinitely, which is what the Americans have been doing (illegally) at Quantanamo for over a decade. If we make exceptions to international law for some of the players, like the U.S., that makes us as bad as they are. Much of the world sees the U.S. as a terrorist state, and I can see why. The U.S. has killed far more Afghan civilians, about 20,000, than terrorists with ties to Afghanistan have killed U.S. civilians.
Also the U.S. created the Taliban, by recruiting the most militant extreme Muslims to fight Russia in the 1980s, so you reap what you sow.
The vast majority of Afghan people were no fans of the extremist Taliban. Early on a coalition of Afghan statesmen approached the U.S. and said that they would capture Bin Laden, as long as he was allowed due process. The U.S. refused to even consider that option.
Bin Laden was well on his way to insignificance before the U.S. raised his profile as the arch-enemy of the American people. The U.S. preoccupation with Bin Laden, and their slaughtering of children and civilians in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan, helped the recruitment of more militants to the Al Queda, and more resentment against the West including Canada.
The convention states explicitly that a minor can volunteer for military service and that a signatory state can accept that service. The state must take all feasible measures to ensure the child does not engage in direct military action. Can we reasonably expect that a 15 year old who volunteers for military service will retain their right to parental care, freedom of expression or freedom from corporal punishment, or is the voluntary service a waiving of those rights, for the duration of their service?
Corporal punishment? Torture goes far beyond corporal punishment and is illegal for any nation to carry out on prisoners of war or detainees, under the Geneva convention and other treaties, which American has ignored.
Tarp you think it was all about a Russian pipeline? You cant be serious..
let me refresh your memory
If the U.S. wanted to reduce the risk of terrorism and catch Bin Laden, there were far more effective ways than a full-blown war in Afghanistan.
Afghanistan is in a key position relative to Central Asia, South Asia and the Middle East. The United States has long tried to establish the Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline from Turkmenistan which as a huge amount of natural gas, to India, and is still lobbying strongly for the pipeline to be built. The pipeline would criss-cross Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India.
International law states that you never lose your right to due process...
Quote:
Originally Posted by ellemint
Corporal punishment? Torture goes far beyond corporal punishment and is illegal for any nation to carry out on prisoners of war or detainees...
To save you from writing any further irrelevant rants, I'll repost the last couple of lines from the first post of mine.
Quote:
Of course, that doesn't justify any torture or inhumane treatment in Guantanamo, but after reading through the international treaties, his age seems a moot point
To add a little: The entire premise of my argument over those two posts was that Khadr was not a child soldier and that it's possible for a child to waive certain rights, at least in a practical sense. As noted above, I specifically stated that his treatment in Guantanamo was not justified.
Nothing you wrote has anything to do with what I wrote.
You've quoted my posts but who, exactly, are you arguing with?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
