Stewart Rhodes at Oath Keepers expands on a conversation Mike Vanderboegh and I were having about the application of the laws of war against Americans. It's a good read that links to an important paper on "enemy combatant status." [Read]
Question: If "certain" members of the Administration follow through with their logic, and order strikes and issue kill-on-sight orders against American civilians, do they then become - and can/will they be treated as - unlawful combatants?
After all, though they command the armed forces, they: - do not wear a uniform or insignia, - do not openly bear arms, and - do not obey the laws of war, in their treatment of civilian non-combatants.
I read Stewart Rhodes' observation that WE don't meet the criteria of "lawful combatant", but then I noticed that neither do the politicians who would presume to have and use this power.
Question: If "certain" members of the Administration follow through with their logic, and order strikes and issue kill-on-sight orders against American civilians, do they then become - and can/will they be treated as - unlawful combatants?
ReplyDeleteAfter all, though they command the armed forces, they:
- do not wear a uniform or insignia,
- do not openly bear arms, and
- do not obey the laws of war, in their treatment of civilian non-combatants.
I read Stewart Rhodes' observation that WE don't meet the criteria of "lawful combatant", but then I noticed that neither do the politicians who would presume to have and use this power.
Well David, I guess you must be a 'Wacko Bird' ....
ReplyDeleteAmash: Who's a 'wacko bird?'