British forces demolish Iraqi jail to free fellow soldiers

Just to add my 2 cents into this discussion. If a soldier is performing a military mission - not in uniform, then he indeed would be considered a spy if he was facing an armed and organized military.

What these two individuals were doing - I have absolutely no clue.

Where they attempting to conduct a combat recon to gather intelligence on the opposing force?.

Or where they functioning in an undercover police role to identify locations of individuals wanted by the current government of Iraq at the bequest of said government?

If you can answer that question - you have your answer about the Geneva Status of the soldiers in question.

The militia if they do not work for the government could they be classified as:
Either at war with the government or traitors?

And how would that change the situation if rebels who are not in a recognised uniform have captured soliders who are out of uniform?

Screwing around with the SAS though is a quick way for the Militia to find their heads on a platter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Papewaio

The militia if they do not work for the government could they be classified as:
Either at war with the government or traitors?

---

That is why I wondered about the situation. If the Militia is opposing the government then they are in essence rebels or traitors.

If they are to be classified as traitors - then the Geneva Conventions might not apply at all, only the Hague Conventions actually then apply to this situation.

If they are classified as rebels fighting a sponatous (SP) uprising against the occupation force - they don't need uniforms only a loose organizational structure. And the Geneva Convention definetly applies to them and so does the Hague Conventions regarding the rules of war.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Papewaio

Screwing around with the SAS though is a quick way for the Militia to find their heads on a platter.

---

That would be the Superman syndrome. There is only so much that a squadron of commandos can do in a city the size of Basra. Since 2003 there have been roughly 6000 British soldiers on 1.5 million inhabitants in the city, far too few to maintain law and order or even to know what's what and who is doing what to whom. It is becoming quite clear the much-vaunted 'relative peace' in the British sector was due to a policy of 'don't ask, don't tell' in which the local militias (there are several of them) were allowed to settle scores and divide the local spoils, not the lest of which was control of the police force. This they now seem to have achieved, and the ones who are keeping their heads down are the Brits. Officers are rather frank about it:

But British officers who served in southern Iraq say the price is now being paid for letting members of the Mehdi Army, led by the radical Shia cleric Muqtada Sadr, and the Badr Brigade, which has Iranian support, join the security forces. "There was little or no vetting", one officer said. "The idea was just because these were Shias and anti-Baath, they will be all right."
The Independent

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Redleg

If they are classified as rebels fighting a sponatous (SP) uprising against the occupation force - they don't need uniforms only a loose organizational structure. And the Geneva Convention definetly applies to them and so does the Hague Conventions regarding the rules of war.

---

Interesting point Redleg. Would that mean that any native Iraqi insurgents currently being detained at Guantanamo are being detained in contravention of the Geneva and Hague Conventions?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hurin_Rules

Interesting point Redleg. Would that mean that any native Iraqi insurgents currently being detained at Guantanamo are being detained in contravention of the Geneva and Hague Conventions?

---

That is a distint (spelling seems off) possiblity. One would have to determine if they were members of a spontanous uprising or a criminal element? But in my understanding of both conventions - they should be accorded POW status until such a determination has been accomplished.

My understanding is that no detainee's are sent to Gauntanamo until a tribunal is initially held in the country of capture - be it Afganstan or Iraq. It would be interesting to research to see if the initial tribunals are still being held - or if an individual detaineed is immediately shipped to Gauntanamo? The answer to that question would determine indeed if the conventions are being violated would it not?

To be honest I have not looked into any of the Iraq detainee's for some time - so I don't know what the answer is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdrianII

That would be the Superman syndrome. There is only so much that a squadron of commandos can do in a city the size of Basra. Since 2003 there have been roughly 6000 British soldiers on 1.5 million inhabitants in the city, far too few to maintain law and order or even to know what's what and who is doing what to whom.

---

Actually I was thinking more along the lines of terror and assassination syndrome as displayed in NI, where suspected militia members and particularly their leaders get knocked off in ambushes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Papewaio

Actually I was thinking more along the lines of terror and assassination syndrome as displayed in NI, where suspected militia members and particularly their leaders get knocked off in ambushes.

---

God knows what those two SAS were up to in Basra. But I bet some of their superiors aren't too happy about it. Look at the fall-out. On the other hand, the militias were probably waiting for an occasion like this to call British bluff.

“Interesting point Redleg. Would that mean that any native Iraqi insurgents currently being detained at Guantanamo are being detained in contravention of the Geneva and Hague Conventions?” Well, they were declared illegal fighters to escape the debate… Either they were fighters defending their country, so they should have been released after the peace treaty or equivalent, and kept the right of soldiers (matriculation, rank and name). Either they were criminals and should be judged. After you have the problem of the court and country, but I think they should have better treatment in the US than in front of the people of the Northern Alliance. The Bush Administration created a vacuum. I think they will regret it. ~D

“God knows what those two SAS were up to in Basra.” Apparently, they were spying to find out where the flooding of weapons from Iran arrives. And, as a former soldier, I approve the action to free them. You don’t leave your men behind. Especially in this kind of environment…