Somebody explain this to me: Enemy Belligerent

http://assets.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/politics/ARM10090.pdf

To provide for the interrogation and detention of enemy belligerents who
commit hostile acts against the United States, to establish certain limita-
tions on the prosecution of such belligerents for such acts, and for
other purposes.


Ummm...Belligerent? Really?

I mean, what is the legal definition, since obviously this is legalese?

What does it mean?

This phrase 1st came across MY radar shortly after we invaded Iraq, when WE were termed(briefly!)in US msm, as "the belligerant force"..meaning WE, the aggressor, who attacked without provocation..in military-legaleze.
I'll be interested in other insights by du-ers.

:rofl:

As far as a legal definition

Belligerent
Definition - Noun
: a belligerent nation, state, or person

Definition - adj
1 : waging war
: carrying on war
specif
: belonging to or recognized as an organized military power protected by and subject to the laws of war
2 : inclined to or exhibiting hostility or a combative temperament

http://research.lawyers.com/glossary/belligerent.html

A 'belligerent' was a person (or power) participating in a war. In instances of rebellion particularly, the question arose whether the rebels were mere insurrectionists, subject to the law of the empire or country they rose against, or belligerents, engaged in war with that empire or power, and subject to the protections of customary international law in the conduct of battle and treatment as captives. To extend recognition of 'belligerent rights' was short of diplomatic recognition as a government.

This regulation would seem to be trying to declare war, in effect, by defining a class of persons as engaged in war with the United States, even though they represent no state, and even though the United States has made no legal declaration of war. The point of this definition is to remove these people from liability under U.S. criminal law, and put them into a category similar to prisoners of war, who can under international law be tried for violations of the laws of war by the military of their captors. Of course, such trials must be in accordance with international law, which specifies they must be the same trial a man of the captor's military would receive, were he charged with the same offense....

This is important...don't be confused by the bill title leaving off the word "unprivileged"...the bill addresses "unprivileged enemy belligerents"

The phrase "unprivileged enemy belligerent" has replaced the phrase "unlawful enemy combatant" (for whatever purposes the US has)


http://writ.news.findlaw.com/mariner/20091104.html

"Unlawful Enemy Combatant vs. Unprivileged Enemy Belligerent

The new law begins by tweaking the definition of individuals eligible for trial before military commissions -- most obviously by scrapping the phrase "unlawful enemy combatant," and replacing it with "unprivileged enemy belligerent." "




Military commissions review court misconstruing 'unlawful combatant'

http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/pdf/091020-LS-rona-military-com-unlawful-combatant.pdf

and from the internaitonal red cross

The legal situation of “unlawful/unprivileged combatants”

http://www.icrc.org/Web/eng/siteeng0.nsf/htmlall/5LPHBV/$File/irrc_849_Dorman.pdf


How the term has been applied in current context

http://www.aclu.org/blog/tag/Lt.%20Col.%20Nancy%20Paul

"As I explained in my previous post, the MCA of 2009 changed the jurisdiction of the military commissions from presiding over the trials of "unlawful enemy combatants" to those of "unprivileged enemy belligerents" — individuals who lack prisoner of war (POW) status as defined by the Third Geneva Convention."


Now, I could give a summary of what this all boils down to but the fact is, people actually do need to read the info to gain a better understanding.

I will follow the links, because frankly, trying to read the bill was making my eyes glaze over.

I need context and a smidgen of commonly common language. I can probably guess some of the wider ramifications, but will read and decide if my intuition is close.

Thanks again.....

and they add more explanation.

http://www.aclu.org/national-security/senators-mccain-and-lieberman-introduce-bill-authorize-indefinite-detention

I'm still reading and re-reading (the older material) everything myself.

You're welcome!