Bush and the Geneva Convention

[bradclark1]

Did you miss my 2nd post, where I already stated:

[i]"Wise up again. Terror nations are on the arise. They will have uniforms and regular armies[ but they won't give a damn about the GC."

We will deal with that if and when it arises. What about fighting a civilized nation?

Quote:
I wonder if your line of thought would change if you were on the recieving end?
That goes for both of us. How many terrorist attacks have you been on the receiving end of?

What don't you understand AL? The Geneva Convention does not cover terrorists. It is not meant to cover terrorists. The GC is for the treatment of uniformed combatants. What is so hard for you to understand about that? So, I am saying the GC cannot and should not be modified to cover tactics for extracting information from terrorist.
You want to shoot fingers and toes off? Fine. Want to beat them nearly to death? Fine. Want to put them on the rack? Fine. They don't have rights. I couldn't care less what is done to them. What I'm saying and saying is the GC is for uniformed combatants to be treated humanely. Don't try and lump terrorists treatment under a convention they are not meant to be under.
Do you understand now?
Terrorist under the GC = Bad
Terrorist not under GC = Good
I can't put it any simpler then that. I am not defending terrorist. Kill them all! I am defending a convention that was and is meant for uniformed combatants.