Well, if I follow this link from the ICRC cite that you provided, it says:
[During 2004, ICRC delegates made regular visits in central and southern Iraq to four places of detention run by the Multi-National Forces and one place of detention under the responsibility of the Iraqi interim government. ICRC delegates regularly registered the persons detained and informed the families of their situation. At the end of 2004, the ICRC was visiting more than 7,300 detainees held by the Multi-National Forces and nearly 1,800 persons detained by the Iraqi interim government. Over 24,600 Red Cross Messages were exchanged between these detainees and their families.
In northern Iraq, the ICRC visited more than 1,200 detainees held in 26 places of detention under the responsibility of the local Kurdish authorities. Around 2,150 Red Cross messages were exchanged between the detainees and their families.](International Committee of the Red Cross)
So there are 7,300+1,800+1,200=10,300 detainees in Iraq, plus 1,060 in GiTMO and Afghanistan, total 11,360 by ICRC count, so the numbers are not that far apart.
Btw, here is another number that I didn’t see in AI report:
Y’know, a lot of this bruhaha could be cleared up if the Bush Administration simply allowed Amnesty International (and any other concerned groups) visit Gitmo and check things out for themselves.
Have you read the last few posts? The USA does allow the ICRC to visit and make inspections. The ICRC is the ONLY agency authorized to make inspections under the Geneva conventions.
AI is so politcally biased, I wouldn’t allow it to inspect my bathroom…
We could let Nightline inspect the camps, but that is prohibited. The ICRC is the Protecting Power. One of the protections is that against public curiosity. They are not animals to seen in a zoo.
What exactly would be the “political bias” of an organization that has managed to piss off the governments of the United States, Iran, and the People’s Republic of China?
Note that AI listed the USA as having “Political Prisoners”- years before Gitmo and 9-11. They also listed the USA as having more Human right violations than Cuba! :rolleyes:
But if you don’t think they are biased- there is nothing I can do to help you. Let’s not hijack this with a debate on the bias of AI- if you want to do that, start another thread. This is my last post on AI, here.
However, the point is moot. The Geneva Conventions make the ICRC the SOLE Inspection agency under it, and if we did let AI in, we’d be violating the Geneva Conventions. Also- if the ICRC can’t do something- with the full force of International law and treaties behind it= then AI can do nothing but stir shit. Besides as Paul in Saudi so wisely said “They are not animals to seen in a zoo.”
Is this one of those quantum kind of things? Where the existence of Geneva Con. protections are dependent on the observer? So that the Guantanamees are accorded Geneva protections for thier privacy and dignity, but otherwise not?
No, there is a misunderstanding between people of good will here as to what ‘rights’ are. The detainees are protected from the abuses of show trials, of public humiliation, of being treated as criminals and being murdered in captivity (among other things).
These are the rights provided to honorable soldiers who fight by the rules and fall into the hands of their enemies and they are considerable when you think about the treatment of the detained in olden days.
But these rights, these protections are unfamiliar to many posters here and seem weak compared to the civil rights assured by civil law. They are right of course. A civil society protects its people from the arbitrary power of brute force. War is force, and is arbitrary. People caught up in war have little appeal to civil law.
The Americans have screwed up lots of things. The have even screwed up lots of things concerning the handling of these detainees. Still, the treatment has been pretty humane. (Would you rather be in an American POW camp or an Afghani one?) But in war, ‘humane’ is a pretty basic thing.
Even if the American dotted every ‘i’ and crossed every ‘t,’ (which they did not do) the treatment of these men would seem pretty harsh by the standards of civil law.
As I said, war is cruel. This thread is discussing the very least of it.
“Let’s not hijack this with a debate on the bias of AI- if you want to do that, start another thread. This is my last post on AI, here.” Dude. No hijacks please!
