• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Afghan Detainee Mega Thread

http://sympaticomsn.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060602/afghanistan_prisoners_060602

As Canadian military brass take fire at home for the policy of handing over prisoners to the Afghan army, Canadian forces on the ground are dealing with the sometimes grim reality of the agreement.

Canadian troops have been aggressively patrolling Afghanistan in recent months, engaging the enemy, raiding suspected hideouts and taking prisoners.

On a recent patrol with Canadian forces "outside the wire" in the Panjwai region of Afghanistan, CTV's Middle East Bureau Chief Janis Mackey Frayer watched the scenario play out as soldiers tried to decide what to do with a suspected Taliban insurgent they captured.

"By law, they are handed over to Afghan authorities," Mackey Frayer said.

"But in this case, during a raid at a compound where a Canadian vehicle had been ambushed, Afghan soldiers threatened summary execution. They were adamant he was Taliban and should be forced to pay."

CTV cameras captured the discussion as it unfolded.

"They want to execute him here. I am obviously not for that. Recommend pickup or holding," says one soldier, speaking over a radio.

"He's probably of low intel value but either we take him or he gets executed. I need you to manage that. Over."

Under the tense circumstances, the Canadian soldiers decide to hold onto the prisoner until he can be delivered to less agitated Afghan authorities -- contravening the current policy on prisoners.

But eventually, the Canadians hand him back to the Afghan soldiers.

For the next 24-hours he remains handcuffed in the back of a pickup truck.

Then he disappears, his whereabouts, and fate, unknown.

When Canadian soldiers first arrived in Afghanistan after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, they handed detainees over to the United States.

Under a new agreement brokered in December however, captured fighters are now handed over to the Afghan military.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper said he doesn't expect the agreement to change any time soon.

"Well, we have a firm agreement with the Afghan government, and that agreement protects Canada's obligation, Canada's international obligations, and obviously we will stay in touch with Afghan authorities to ensure that that agreement is being honoured," he said.

A recent report in The Globe and Mail claims prisoners captured in Afghanistan are not subject to the protection of the Geneva Convention, because Canada does not consider them to be legal combatants.

Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor refuted the reports this week, however.

"When they take prisoners, they will always follow the rules of the Geneva Convention, no lower standard than that," he told the Commons.

The 1949 Geneva Conventions provide protections and rights to prisoners of war, including the right to be released at the end of a conflict, and to not face criminal charges.

Canadian regulations updated in 1991 allow for tribunals to be held in order to determine the status of detainees under the Conventions when there is doubt.

O'Connor also said the Afghan government allows the Red Cross and Red Crescent organizations to monitor prisoners.

Other coalition countries, such as Britain and the Netherlands have prisoner agreements similar with the Afghan government.

The Dutch government, however, takes the agreement one stop further by reserving the right to actually visit the detainees their soldiers take.

The United States is the only country under no obligation to turn over suspected militants to local authorities.

While official numbers are difficult to obtain, it is believed there are at least two hundred suspected Taliban prisoners in Kandahar's three jails.

With a report by CTV's Middle East Bureau Chief Janis Mackey Frayer


So we can't give them to the US and we can't give them to the locals so what do they want us to do?
 
I like what the Dutch have done, which is to reserve the right to inspect any prisoners they hand over to the Afghanis. Perhaps we should add that clause into our agreement, if it isn't there already, and exercise that right fully.
 
Maybe if we don't want the Afghanis to execute prisoners out of hand we should hand them over to the Americans! :eek:

Wait, the left wing socialist crowd in Canada would rather not turn in prisoners to the evil US, they would rather have these incidents with the local police forces every time we take prisoners! ::)

Damned if you do and damned if you dont!
 
By the article, it did not seem to me that they struggled with the policy.

Hand them over to the Afghan authorities. Do not allow prisoners in your possesion to be abused or executed.
Pretty simple guidelines, mix with Law of Armed conflict, and a good chunk of human decency with some common sense, and they will make good decisions. Like they did in the article above.

The soldiers are not conflicted, it is the media who is making the politicians and public conflicted.
 
They shoud be summary execution's, the Taliban are not POW's, they are CRIMINAL'S
and MURDERER'S, that's fine the Canadians look after them but after they are turned over to the Afghan authorities if they want to execute them, that's fine! It's there country ! :threat:
 
bilton090 said:
They shoud be summary execution's, the Taliban are not POW's, they are CRIMINAL'S
and MURDERER'S, that's fine the Canadians look after them but after they are turned over to the Afghan authorities if they want to execute them, that's fine! It's there country ! :threat:

So by doing onto others as they would do onto us, make us a better people, better soldiers, a country Afghans and others respect...? Or would you rather have Canadian soldiers being tried at the World court?

Part of raising a professional army, which is what we are trying to do with the ANA is to show those soldiers that the only one who has a right to execute people is the gov't and its courts...not the military. To us they are prisioners, to the ANA they may be criminals, but its is not soldier who should be doing the executing.
 
While we all have our desires as to the outcome of these prisoners, they need to be handed over to the proper authority. Only by doing this do we set the example to ANA and ANP. It isn't always going to work out right, but remember we are training a group of people that for 30 years delivered justice immediately and think it is perfectly normal.

What we are not hearing at all, is the outcome of the courts in regards to these prisoners.  Can't find anything at all..any links anyone??
 
+1 on that Ash.

I saw the footage as well....they didn't struggle with the policy at all.  ::)

The media are blowing things way out of proportion yet again.

Regards
 
Armymedic said:
So by doing onto others as they would do onto us, make us a better people, better soldiers, a country Afghans and others respect...? Or would you rather have Canadian soldiers being tried at the World court?

Part of raising a professional army, which is what we are trying to do with the ANA is to show those soldiers that the only one who has a right to execute people is the gov't and its courts...not the military. To us they are prisioners, to the ANA they may be criminals, but its is not soldier who should be doing the executing.
 Canadian solders being tried at the world court ?, BULL CRAP ! You do your job, you look after them, then turn the scum over to the Afghan authorities, end of story ! now your crying over scum that kill woman & children. ( public beheading )
 
bilton090 said:
 Canadian solders being tried at the world court ?, BULL CRAP ! You do your job, you look after them, then turn the scum over to the Afghan authorities, end of story ! now your crying over scum that kill woman & children.
you recommend summary executions and think that we wouldn't hang for it? Of course we would! Use your friggin' head. Any Canadian soldier who conducted an execution would unquestionably be tried and sentenced in Canada, and quite possibly in the World Court.

Nobody is crying over criminals being punished, get a grip. Medic is saying that Canadian soldiers do their job properly, by following protocols and SOP, and by teaching the ANA (part of our role over there) how to be soldiers instead of thugs in uniform.
 
paracowboy said:
you recommend summary executions and think that we wouldn't hang for it? Of course we would! Use your friggin' head. Any Canadian soldier who conducted an execution would unquestionably be tried and sentenced in Canada, and quite possibly in the World Court.

Nobody is crying over criminals being punished, get a grip. Medic is saying that Canadian soldiers do their job properly, by following protocols and SOP, and by teaching the ANA (part of our role over there) how to be soldiers instead of thugs in uniform.
I'm not saying that Canada soldier's should do it, but if the Afghan's do it, crap happen's, ( live by the sword, die by the sword ).
 
bilton090 said:
I'm not saying that Canada soldier's should do it, but if the Afghan's do it, crap happen's, ( live by the sword, die by the sword ).
guilt by association. We are training the ANA, we are working alongside the ANA. They commit atrocities and war crimes, we are guilty of allowing it, and in the eyes of the folks at home, we are guilty of teaching it. We lose the moral high ground, we lose the War, and we lose the reason we're fighting it.

When we're fighting, kill 'em all as efficiently as possible. Once the fight is over, patch 'em up, search 'em, silinece 'em, speed 'em to the rear, where they can then be processed according to our rules, and the Rule of Law. Do it right, or don't do it.
 
paracowboy said:
guilt by association. We are training the ANA, we are working alongside the ANA. They commit atrocities and war crimes, we are guilty of allowing it, and in the eyes of the folks at home, we are guilty of teaching it. We lose the moral high ground, we lose the War, and we lose the reason we're fighting it.

When we're fighting, kill 'em all as efficiently as possible. Once the fight is over, patch 'em up, search 'em, silinece 'em, speed 'em to the rear, where they can then be processed according to our rules, and the Rule of Law. Do it right, or don't do it.
  You are right Para, if after they get to the rear & are executed great, these cockroaches sould not get any right's ! , they should get exterminated like the rabbit dogs they are !
 
bilton090 said:
  You are right Para, if after they get to the rear & are executed great, these cockroaches sould not get any right's ! , they should get exterminated like the rabbit dogs they are !

Obviously you failed the PO on the Geneva Convention and also didn't read Paracowboy's post properly....

He meant bag and tag...not silence as in to kill them    ::)

Someone needs to get a grip....

Regards
 
Recce By Death said:
Obviously you failed the PO on the Geneva Convention and also didn't read Paracowboy's post properly....

He meant bag and tag...not silence as in to kill them    ::)

Someone needs to get a grip....

Regards
But Gen. Gauthier said there is no risk that ordinary soldiers or junior officers could face war-crimes charges, even if detainees handed over to the Afghans were tortured or killed.
 
bilton090 said:
But Gen. Gauthier said there is no risk that ordinary soldiers or junior officers could face war-crimes charges, even if detainees handed over to the Afghans were tortured or killed.

Not talking about what the General said....what you are saying is completely against the GC and if you were to do something like you have stated...

You'd be standing in front of 12 without your head dress.

Now as to what the General said...the troops can't be held accountable if they hand them over to the ANA.

However, if they do knowing full well that the prisoners would be tortured or executed...well, you see the difference.

As such the troops on the ground did the correct thing.

Regards
 
If the NDP get in charge then these captured taliban would probably be allowed to come to Canada, apply for refugee status, get free benefits, sue the CF for "aggressive detainment" and eventually become members of the NDP (as one of our MPs in 2012?)..

Sad thought.
 
ArmyRick said:
If the NDP get in charge then these captured taliban would probably be allowed to come to Canada, apply for refugee status, get free benefits, sue the CF for "aggressive detainment" and eventually become members of the NDP (as one of our MPs in 2012?)..

Sad thought.
You got that right on !
 
As long as we have a standing agreement negotiated by our government with the Afghan government, there is no "struggling".

You catch someone you suspect as being Taliban, you follow the SOP and turn him over to the Afghans, US, MPs, whoever you are ordered to. If the Canadian public has a problem with it, take it up with whoever negotiated the agreement. If Pte. Bloggins has a feeling that the detainee will be shot, he is more than welcome to add his observation to the patrol report once he returns to the base.

We turned all manner of foreign troops over to their domestic governments (Germany, Japan) knowing beyond a shadow of a doubt that they would be treated to show trials and hung or shot - it was no big deal sixty years ago, and it is no big deal now.

I think that you would be pretty hard pressed to make a case against a Canadian soldier if he followed orders and SOPs, turned the detainee over to the representative of a democratically elected government and the detainee died or was executed in their care.
 
A problem with summary execution is they are very scary for the average civilian. He will wonder if this could happen to him. Someone could accidentally confuse him with a bad guy or someone could threatened him and execute him if he doesn't obey, claiming he was a bad guy. Execution after fair trial feels much more secure for the average civilian because he doesn't feel this could be him. To build trust and respect for the government and the law, I would try to avoid summary executions.
 
Back
Top