Would he have to be held as a prisinor of war if caught or would he fall under the US judicial system? Since we are at war with Iraq would we have to give him back to the Iraqis after the war even though he killed a thousand US troops? Keep in mind that he would not have killed any civilians and he made a point to not use any inhumane methods of destruction, ie chem, nuke or bio. Say he just bombed a giant barracks or giant building that was only military?
Basically, if they guy was caught and not killed in while being caught, would he just be a prisioner of war and would we have to give him back to Iraq, where he would be a hero, after the war?
Why the judicial system? Wouldn’t he count as a commando, or something? How is it different than if, say, an Iraqi brigade landed on the east coast? Does it fall under some special category for saboteurs?
Of course, it would depend on HOW he did it. If he was wearing an Iraqi uniform, he would have to be treated as a POW. If he was dressed in civilian clothes, or wearing a US uniform, he would not be protected by the Geneva Conventions and could be charged with murder just like anyone else who opened fire on a soldier.
<slight hijack>Are there any buildings (or groups of buildings) in the U.S. that have 1000+ military and NO civilians? I’ve been in and around Air Force Bases pretty much every day since 1994 and the only possible place I can come up with would be the Basic Training complexes at Lackland AFB. Even there I wouldn’t be surprised if the commanders had civilian secretaries. Most bases are full of civilians.</slight hijack>
Our government would have to scramble to find a way not to recognize the soldier as a soldier. They would lie, cheat, and make up stuff. They would never allow him to be returned to Iraq after the war, because it would make GWB’s penis look very small. For that reason, it would be a matter of national security, and they would put him in a deep hole, and swear the entire matter was accomplished by civilians, working for Al Queda.
We would drop more bombs, too. To cover it all up.
I don’t understand why everyone is concerned with whether civilians are present on a military base or not. The Geneva Convention simply requires that civilians not specifically be targeted in an attack. Any civilians killed in the course of an attack on a legitimate military target are not punishable as a war crime under the Geneva Convention.
Think about it. Civilians are routinely present on military bases (as has been noted), as well as ships such as aircraft carriers. In the case of the current war, civilian reporters are embedded with troops on the ground. They all take their chances. While they should not be specifically targeted under the Geneva Convention, some locations for civilians are more hazardous than others in wartime.
BTW, Tris, since this is GQ, can you please supply some supporting documentation for the main points in your post?
Besides wearing the Iraqi uniform* and not specifically targeting civilians, to have POW status he would also have to accomplish the “break in” Commando style, not by pretending to be a civilian or hijacking a bus/plane load of civilians.
*In fact there is a precedent for this: Nazi saboteurs upon landing in the U.S. wore thier uniforms, so that if caught on the beach from the sub they would have POW status. Here’s a cite for that http://pages.prodigy.net/michaelmbbates/column334.htm