The GC is binding on signatory countries even when the enemy is not a signatory, so let's not go there.
But if they are not POW's, because they do not represent a country, then they must be criminals. As criminals they have rights, but Bush wants to have it both ways.
And please don't argue that they are not POWs and they are not criminals. Either they are soldiers of another country or they are violating the law.
I see them as criminals. Don't elevate them to a different status because you want to circumvent our constitution.
Classifying terroists as POW's under the Geneva convention directly negates the entire purpose of it.
The Geneva convention is in place as a mutual agreement between warring countries. It protects our troops as long as we show enemy troops the same consideration.
Bush is actually upholding the GC by not clasifying the terrorists as POW's.
The GC is based on contracting parties. I think Al-Queda slicing Nick Berg's head off was a sign that they are not agreeing to the contract.
It damages the credibility of the GC to extend it to parties for which it was not designed to apply to.