View Full Version : Why didn't Che's killers serve time? - For war crimes
commieboy
3rd May 2003, 04:45
I mean, that was a revolution, Che was uniformed, and he was a POW.....doenst that violate the geneva convention or somthing similiar...it just seems like someone has to pay for his death.
Comrade Gorley
3rd May 2003, 05:01
There's the theory that the CIA killed him, but that's being discussed elsewhere. If it's true, however, it could explain why no one got tried.
Kapitan Andrey
3rd May 2003, 08:55
It wasn't WAR...it was kind'a rebellion...so there can not be POWs!!!
Second:"Everyone" wanted his death!(I mean CIA and Bolivian govt.)
CubanFox
4th May 2003, 11:27
The Geneva Convention doesn't protect rebels. I don't think so, anyway.
Hate Is Art
4th May 2003, 14:37
Geneva Convention doesn't protect against revoulution or rebellion because they aren't seen as proper war so there can be no P.O.W.'s. Also rebels are seen as anti-state thus Treason.
El Barbudo
5th May 2003, 00:08
rebels were covering them in peasants house, and geneva convention says to not use population to cover soldiers...
Severian
5th May 2003, 07:01
The reason they were not prosecuted has nothing to do with legalities. Che was murdered after being taken prisoner, no two ways about that.
It's political. The big fish eat the little ones, and the more powerful war criminals prosecute the less powerful ones. War crimes prosecutions cannot be anything else.....unless there had been a victorious revolution in Bolivia, of course.
pastradamus
6th May 2003, 22:38
The people who win write the history.Why has george bush never gone on trial in the hague?...u get my point.
Trying the people will do no good. I know the bunch of them are scum but they have done more damage by making a Che a martyr. Killing one person for another is not going to solve anything. I just hate the fact that the US thought they had the right to kill him just because he was the greatest Guerilla ever apart from Ho Chi Minh.
I find it also ludicrous that rebels and guerillas are not protected. Should Whashington have been shot by the british, should mandela have been shot by the apartheid. Revolutionary war should be recognised under the genava convention. Its just the world seeinng them as terroists again.
Subcomandante Marcos
7th May 2003, 23:43
jajajjaja, now there is a funny question.
When has any of the people involved, and we all know them, in killing innocent people for their communist ideas. They have gone as far as to promote coups, kill the civilians who have nothing to do with war, thye have driven south america to the verge of poverty, they have destroyed millions of life, directly or undirectly, all around the globe.
There is no way they are going to be charge with anything, they are far too powerful to be judged by anyone. That is why the US didnt want to enter the International Court in Belgium I think.
I know several individuals who have commited genocidies and are still walking around like nothing happened, and the first name to pop up in my mind is Pinochet, El Mamo Contreras, Los Dirigentes de la DINA, La Caravana de la Muerte, Patria y Libertad, Rolando Matus, uff, the lists goes on and on.
But ui history who is going to judge them, or does anyone on their mind support the american killing of native americans, or the colonization of Africa by Europe ??
(Edited by Subcomandante Marcos at 7:44 pm on May 7, 2003)
Organic Revolution
8th May 2003, 05:15
the geveva convention only has grounds to those countrys that signed it... as far as i know bolivia never did
GCusack
8th May 2003, 18:30
Che was killed by the Bolivian government and the CIA, also, as many of you have said the Geneva covention does not cover rebels because it was not an 'official' war. but also the War crimes courts were probably happy, at the time for Che's death. Now ofcourse its done them more harm than good.
Rancid
13th May 2003, 14:51
Che was killed by cia. An cia is a product of the kapitalism and us friendly world. Because they were fu..ing american they served no time!
FU*K america!!
scott thesocialist
13th May 2003, 16:53
just one point it was not the us that killed che they wanted to keep him alive at least for the time being it was a bolivian solider for revenge for the death of his comrades killed earlier by che. che had no status in bolivia he was just a peasant in the eyes of the bolivian government so no law could keep him alive
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2020 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.