Download Free Treatment Of Battlefield Detainees In The War On Terrorism Updated Ed Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online Treatment Of Battlefield Detainees In The War On Terrorism Updated Ed and write the review.

Contents: (1) Current Status (as of '07); Critics¿ Views; Applicable Law; (2) The Law of War: Characterizing the Conflict; Authority to Detain during an Internat. Armed Conflict; POWs; Civilian Detainees; Unlawful Belligerents; Interp. of GPW Article 4; GPW Art. 4A(1): Does Al Qaeda Form ¿Part of¿ the Armed Forces of a Party to the Conflict?; GPW Art. 4A(2): Does Al Qaeda ¿Belong to¿ a Party to the Conflict?; The Four Criteria; Determining Status under GPW Art. 5; Detention in Non-Internat. Armed Conflicts; (3) Treat. of Detainees at Guantánamo: Interrogation; Trial and Punishment; POWs; Civilians; Unlawful Belligerents; Security Measures; Repatriation; Right to Redress; (4) Congress¿s Role: Detainee Treatment Act of '05; Military Commissions Act of '06.
In June 2004, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that U.S. courts have jurisdiction to hear challenges on behalf of persons detained at the U.S. Naval Station in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, in connection with the war against terrorism. The Court overturned a ruling that no U.S. court has jurisdiction to hear petitions for habeas corpus on behalf of the detainees because they are aliens detained abroad. This report provides an overview of the law of war and the historical treatment of wartime detainees, in particular the U.S. practice; describes how the detainees¿ status might affect their rights and treatment; and summarizes activity of the 108th and 109th Congresses related to detention in connection with the war against terrorism.
Focused on the international community's response to the conflict in Syria, this is a book about the inexorable quest for justice, even in the face of seemingly impenetrable obstacles erected by actors intent on ensuring impunity. It features a number of creative ideas emerging from states and civil society actors intent on pursuing justice for atrocities in Syria
The 2004 revelations of detainee maltreatment at the Abu Ghraib prison outside of Baghdad, Iraq have led to an exhaustive overhaul of Army doctrine and training with respect to this topic. The Army has identified disconnects in its individual, leader, and collective training programs, and has also identified the absence of a deliberate, focused doctrinal crosswalk between the two principal branches concerned with detainees, Military Intelligence (MI) and Military Police (MP). These problems and their consequences are real and immediate. The perceptions of just treatment held by citizens of our nation and, to a great extent the world at large, have been and are being shaped by the actions of the US Army, both in the commission of detainee maltreatment but also, and more importantly, in the way the Army addresses its institutional shortcomings. This study examines the relationship over time between doctrine in two branches of the Army Military Police (MP) and Military Intelligence (MI) and the Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War (GPW). Specifically, it analyzes the MP detention field manual series and the MI interrogation field manual series to evaluate their GPW content. It also further examines the relationship of military police and military intelligence to each other in the enemy prisoner-of-war (EPW) and detainee operations environment, as expressed in their doctrinal manuals. Finally, the study looks at the Army's experience in detainee operations through the prism of six conflicts or contingency operations: the Korean War, Vietnam, Operation URGENT FURY (Grenada, 1983), Operation JUST CAUSE (Panama, 1989), Operation DESERT STORM (Iraq, 1991), and Operation UPHOLD DEMOCRACY (Haiti, 1994).
This report finds parallels in U.S. prisoner and detainee operations in World War II, Korea, Vietnam, and Iraq. It recommends that detailed doctrine should be in place prior to detention and that detainees should be interviewed when first detained.
Many years after the United States initiated a military response to the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001, the nation continues to prosecute what it considers an armed conflict against transnational terrorist groups. Understanding how the law of armed conflict applies to and regulates military operations executed within the scope of this armed conflict against transnational non-state terrorist groups is as important today as it was in September 2001. In The War on Terror and the Laws of War seven legal scholars, each with experience as military officers, focus on how to strike an effective balance between the necessity of using armed violence to subdue a threat to the nation with the humanitarian interest of mitigating the suffering inevitably associated with that use. Each chapter addresses a specific operational issue, including the national right of self-defense, military targeting and the use of drones, detention, interrogation, trial by military commission of captured terrorist operatives, and the impact of battlefield perspectives on counter-terror military operations, while illustrating how the law of armed conflict influences resolution of that issue. This Second Edition carries on the critical mission of continuing the ongoing dialogue about the law from an unabashedly military perspective, bringing practical wisdom to the contentious topic of applying international law to the battlefield.
Torture has lately become front page news, featured in popular movies and TV shows, and a topic of intense public debate. It grips our imagination, in part because torturing someone seems to be an unthinkable breach of humanity—theirs and ours. And yet, when confronted with horrendous events in war, or the prospect of catastrophic damage to one’s own country, many come to wonder whether we can really afford to abstain entirely from torture. Before trying to tackle this dilemma, though, we need to see torture as a multifaceted problem with a long history and numerous ethical and legal aspects. Confronting Torture offers a multidisciplinary investigation of this wrenching topic. Editors Scott A. Anderson and Martha C. Nussbaum bring together a diversity of scholars to grapple with many of torture’s complexities, including: How should we understand the impetus to use torture? Why does torture stand out as a particularly heinous means of war-fighting? Are there any sound justifications for the use of torture? How does torture affect the societies that employ it? And how can we develop ethical or political bulwarks to prevent its use? The essays here resist the temptation to oversimplify torture, drawing together work from scholars in psychology, history, sociology, law, and philosophy, deepening and broadening our grasp of the subject. Now, more than ever, torture is something we must think about; this important book offers a diversity of timely, constructive responses on this resurgent and controversial subject.