POW's 'Prisoners of War or People overly Welcomed?'




View Poll Results :How do you feel that we treat prisoners?
Too Kindly? 10 62.50%
Too Cruelly? 0 0%
Just Right? 6 37.50%
Voters: 16. You may not vote on this poll

 
--
POW's 'Prisoners of War or People overly Welcomed?'
 
September 9th, 2005  
Spartacus
 
 

Topic: POW's 'Prisoners of War or People overly Welcomed?'


POW's 'Prisoners of War or People overly Welcomed?'
I had posted this a long time ago in another forum. What do you guys think?

Okay first off let me say that I am in no way in favor of excessively abusing or injuring prisoners of war. I do think, however, that modern day interrogation techniques have been stifled by an attempt to maintain political correctness. In other words, it seems like we dont want it to appear as though we are animals, so we go to the far end of the spectrum, ensuring that they are comfortable and secure. This seems to be counter-productive. The only way that you are going to get a prisoner to break is if there is something they fear will happen to them personally, or if there is some reward or value in revealing the information. This is not a theory of mine, but of sociologists for ages; without an incentive, the status quo will not be broken.
I feel that the effort to keep interrogation of prisoners good in the sight of the public is pretty stupid. I mean after all, war in itself is a terrible thing. The only way to shorten it is to a) surrender or b) force the other side to. The best way to do the latter is to be able to make strategically sound and decisive moves. This means that you want the best intel available, and where better than straight from the horses mouth? Why try and keep prisoners with information comfortable and sacrifice more lives? It simply does not make good sense for us to allow prisoners with information to keep that information to themselves. I also feel that the other side would do the same. In fact, of all the countries that signed the Geneva Convention, on the United States of America holds true to it.
I dont have a problem doing everything reasonable in our power to pluck information from prisoners, nor do I feel there is anything inherently wrong about the other side doing it. Other than the fact they are on the other side.
September 9th, 2005  
Missileer
 
 
I think we tend to go a little far in catering to every whim just to look good to the press. I think the maximum security prisons are about for POWs, they are well fed and, if they behave, are treated tolerably well.
September 9th, 2005  
tomtom22
 
 
There is only one way to treat POWs and that is in accordance with the Geneva conventions, no more, no less.
--
POW's 'Prisoners of War or People overly Welcomed?'
September 9th, 2005  
Rabs
 
 
Quote:
There is only one way to treat POWs and that is in accordance with the Geneva conventions, no more, no less.

I agree, until its starts costing american lives.
September 9th, 2005  
Whispering Death
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomtom22
There is only one way to treat POWs and that is in accordance with the Geneva conventions, no more, no less.
I think a 100 year old treaty that was designed to maintain civility between civilised countries hardly aplies to stateless mobs who themselves openly ignore and explot that treaty.
September 9th, 2005  
Italian Guy
 
 
I agree with Spartacus. There is a large amount of sensitive information that we got from those interrogation tecnhiques. I answered 2We treat um just right".
September 9th, 2005  
LeEnfield
 
 
During WW2 in Europe things were not perfect but on the whole they worked out fairly well.
September 9th, 2005  
Marinerhodes
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whispering Death
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomtom22
There is only one way to treat POWs and that is in accordance with the Geneva conventions, no more, no less.
I think a 100 year old treaty that was designed to maintain civility between civilised countries hardly aplies to stateless mobs who themselves openly ignore and explot that treaty.
I agree. Below please look at the Geneva Conventions governing the treatment of POWs

http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/91.htm

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

(b) Taking of hostages;

(c) Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment;

(d) The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.

Tell me what part of the Geneva Conventions were violated by the beheadings of hostages? Oops, did I say hostages and beaheadings, civilians and military personnel?


Quote:
Likewise, prisoners of war must at all times be protected, particularly against acts of violence or intimidation and against insults and public curiosity.
Personally I feel we treat them too well. By the way, while I understand the need to fix any issues we have with the treatment in accordance with the GC I feel that "public scrutiny" is in violation of the GC itself.

Quote:
No physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion, may be inflicted on prisoners of war to secure from them information of any kind whatever. Prisoners of war who refuse to answer may not be threatened, insulted, or exposed to any unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment of any kind.
I understand they are trying to prevent outright torture. But come on, any other form of coercion? Asking a question while you are detained is in and of itself a form of coercion. Unpleasant treatment? I get yelled at by my Master Sergeant and I consider that unpleasant treatment.
September 10th, 2005  
chewie_nz
 
sweet, disregard the geneva convention then and lets all slide down the slope till we're torturing everyone.



i thought the US wanted to be the "good guys". or is it just when it's the easy way.

the geneva convention is one of the things that seperates us from the "baddies"
September 10th, 2005  
Whispering Death
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by chewie_nz
sweet, disregard the geneva convention then and lets all slide down the slope till we're torturing everyone.



i thought the US wanted to be the "good guys". or is it just when it's the easy way.

the geneva convention is one of the things that seperates us from the "baddies"
No, an ocean and our armed forces is what seperates us from the "baddies".

Treaties are made not by one party but by two. Treaties are useless when one side doesn't abide by it. Political restrictions on our warfighting ability is what lost us Vietnam and if we are not vigilant they may also lose us Iraq.