Below is an essay that another student has written. Please read it and respond to it (250 words), giving insight and information on the discussion presented. You are NOT just answering questions, you are reading and responding to what this person has written. This includes agree/disagree as well as extra information. 250 words or more. Thank you.Should terrorist organizations such as Al Qaeda or ISIS be given prisoner of war status and thus be entitled rights of the Geneva Convention?I do not believe that members of terrorist organizations such as Al Qaeda or ISIS should be given prisoner of war status which would entitle them to the rights of the Geneva Convention.According to History.com, The Geneva Convention was a series of international diplomatic meetings that created a number of agreements pertaining to the Humanitarian Law of Armed Conflicts. The first Geneva Convention was held in 1906 and then updated in 1949 after World War Two. In 1949 The Geneva Conventions were expanded to protect not only combatants but also civilians. Rules were put into place that protected wounded and sick soldiers. Protections were also put in place to protect prisoners of war such as, not allowing POW’s to be tortured and providing them with health care. In 1977 Protocols were put in place that increased protections to civilians and also banned the use of weapons that would cause “superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering,” or cause widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment.” (History.com) The Protocols also prohibited things such as taking hostages and acts of terrorism. There are currently 190 states that follow the Geneva Convention. I believe that terrorists should not be given POW status because they clearly do not follow the Geneva Convention. However, I believe that some of the protections in the Geneva conventions such as access to medical care and fair treatment should be given to any prisoner under any circumstance. There have been many instances of terrorist organizations such as ISIS clearly violating the protections put in place during the Geneva Convention such as things like public executions and torture. While researching this topic I found a very interesting article by Forbes.com. This article talks about why the author believes that terrorists should not be entitled to the protections of the Geneva Conventions. This article touches on why things such as “aggressive interrogations” are necessary in keeping the public safe during and after a terrorist attack. https://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2015/03/26/terrorist-organizations-are-not-entitled-to-the-protection-of-the-geneva-conventions/#45edc8bbd96eWhich system of justice would you advise the President to handle regarding captured US-born terrorist? Domestic courts, military tribunals or something else?I believe a military tribunal would be the best system in regards to handling a captured terrorist. I believe a military court would be more suited to try and convict a person who is carrying out attacks in a military fashion. This seems to be the method that is currently being used in the trials against accused terrorists. In former cases such as Hamdi v. Rumsfeld that the class has analyzed military tribunals were used to try the accused. According to the Department of Justice, the president may order any citizen or non-citizen accused of terrorism as an enemy combatant. These combatants are tried in military courts.References:Flows, C. (2015, August 4). Terrorist Organizations Are Not Entitled To The Protection Of The Geneva Conventions. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2015/03/26/terrorist-organizations-are-not-entitled-to-the-protection-of-the-geneva-conventions/#45edc8bbd96e.Detention of American Citizens as Enemy Combatants. (2005, March 31). Retrieved from https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/RL31724.html.History.com Editors. (2017, November 17). Geneva Convention. Retrieved from https://www.history.com/topics/world-war-ii/geneva-convention#section_4.
