Seb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11126 posts, RR: 15 Posted (7 years 10 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 981 times:
Yesterday, I was listening to Fresh Air with Terry Gross. The reason I was listening to that particular program is a whole other story. She was interviewing a lawyer who represented two detainees at Guantanamo who were released. She also interviewed council for the Bush administration. After listening to the whole show, I have a question:
What is the difference between 'Prisoner of War' and 'enemy combatant'? Using World War Two as an example, I would classify Nazi brownshirts and SS officers as enemy combatants because they were fighting against the Allies. After they were detained, they became Prisoners of War.
RichardPrice From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (7 years 10 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 967 times:
US Congress defines 'Enemy Combatant' as thus:
(8) The term 'enemy combatant' has historically referred to all of the citizens of a state with which the Nation is at war, and who are members of the armed force of that enemy state. Enemy combatants in the present conflict, however, come from many nations, wear no uniforms, and use unconventional weapons. Enemy combatants in the war on terrorism are not defined by simple, readily apparent criteria, such as citizenship or military uniform. And the power to name a citizen as an 'enemy combatant' is therefore extraordinarily broad
BHMBAGLOCK From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 2698 posts, RR: 5
Reply 4, posted (7 years 10 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 916 times:
Quoting Mrmeangenes (Reply 3): Those who make this mis-representation often claim the detainees are being denied "constitutional rights" they clearly do not have.
Not only this, they generally have no rights under the Geneva Conventions either. If they want to be protected by the GCs then they can put on uniforms and we'll have a much easier time telling them apart from the good guys.