But, but, but the Supreme Court in Hamdan said... if only we grant Geneva protections to the big meanies in al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, and the like, then those honorable, reasonable folks will kindly treat our soldiers and others they capture according to the rules of law and war. Wait, what's that I hear...? Why, that would be the fine lady in charge of the Villainous Company blog, reporting that Hezbollah, shocker of shockers, will not allow the Red Cross access to the Israeli soldiers they captured, nor will they provide reports on their condition or allow them to contact their families. This in spite of the fact that Israel has granted such rights to Palestinian and other terrorist "soldiers" for over 20 years. I would go on, but the lady of the VC blog has said it best, so I will let her take it away:
"It seems to me that reciprocity is a two-way street. If Geneva coverage is to be extended to insurgent groups under Article 3, then surely reciprocal treatment should be expected from them? Otherwise Geneva is a mockery. I hope Justice Stevens is paying close attention.
Imagine that. Israel fully observes international humanitarian law. But they've never been able to visit an Israeli prisoner captured by Arab terrorists... oops... freedom fighters. Even ones who've now been imprisoned since 1982. But hey... they think about them a whole lot. Somebody get Justice Stevens on the bat phone! He'll shake the sternly wagging finger of international opprobrium at these guys. A few days of that, coupled with his turgid legal prose, should have them just begging for mercy."
For more excellent post-Hamdan commentary, and where we hopefully go from here, check out Grim Reborn (Cliff notes version- that Congress takes up the High Court's invitation to give legislative blessing to the military tribunals set up for terror suspects by the President, but which the Court declared in Hamdan that the executive branch can not set up on its own on the basis of inherent power as commander-in-chief).