Treason

[Caid Ivik]

I am talking about a most dangerous crime in war times, altough many times disused by authoritative regimes. What do you think "treason against country" should mean? Or what kind of sentence would be suitable for it?

[IxianMace]

Treason against a country: Things like if you work in the military forces, and give away classified information to other countries that could use it against your country, etc etc.

Possible sentence: Have the criminal evicted from the country, although this will run the risk of them joining the other side, so you would probably either have to lock them up for life, or have them killed. Just my 2 solaris. :-

[nampigai]

What about a Nazi leaking classified informations to the allies during WW2?

[Anathema]

He wouldn't be treated well by his superiors, obviously. How can you expect a person to be loyal to views he doesn't concur with?

[DjCiD]

What about that guy who is supposde to be an ex-Iraqi Guard member with important information about the war... wonder what Saddam would do if he cought him....

[nampigai]

but we wouldn't see it as treason would we ?

[Caid Ivik]

Traitor can be punished only by the one, who was betrayed, I think.

[nampigai]

ofcourse but if the cause your country is fighting for is unjust in your eyes would you betray it?

[DjCiD]

Would that mean all the anti-bush/war protesters be considered traitors?

[emprworm]

the ones that go to bagdhad and bash america on Iraqi soil are traitors as far as I'm concerned.

if they are not traitors (i'm referring to people that go to bagdhad and critizize america and be a human shield to help Iraq fight america), then please tell me: what is a traitor, exactly?

[Edric O]

Of course they are traitors... Just like a german joining the allies in WW2 would be a traitor.

[nampigai]

let's take this example.

You live in a country ruled by a tyrant, you leak information to the enemy of the country. Now the country would see you as a traitor but to others you may be a hero. It's all up to the eyes that looks, and the cause you fight for.

[Caid Ivik]

Stay in my point. What should democratic country see as treason?

[Davidu]

There is a difference: bertray the ideology, or betray the country...

Like giving up the positions of the tyrant that's leading you to the enemy, so the enemy can kill him... it's treason against the state, but can be useful for the people.

If you give info of the troops, or maps, or if you join the enemy that the worst kind of treason.

A punishment? Traitors can't be trusted, they are dangerous. Should be killed.

[nampigai]

I have difficulties with answering your question, all I can say is how I whould describe a traitor. A close friend that backstabs you.

[Caid Ivik]

So that is the highest treason...

[nampigai]

as I've said it depends on the "traitors" view points if he's opinion is against the ruler of his nation i.e. a spy for soviet in the US, then yes he's a traitor in the US but a hero in the Soviet and vice-versa

[Caid Ivik]

How do you think the betrayed country should punish him?

[nampigai]

I don't know cause in the traitors eyes he faught for his beliefs, it may not be the same as ours, but it was his beliefs.

[Caid Ivik]

But state doesn't punish us on base of our inner feeling of guilt, but on its laws.

[nampigai]

you're absolutely right, and the punishment will most proberly be excecution.

[Gobalopper]

Anyone know what happened to that guy from the FBI who was giving out classified info? I think they said they might try him with the death penalty.

[nampigai]

nope haven't heard about him, since the news about his capture.

[Egeides]

All what is about spying is of the realm of Machiavelli. What makes the system work in such a not-very-moral thing is that since all parties are acting same, they should basically balance themselves. If a group of person would decide to not do so, then only the worst elements would get advantaged, which isn't better. So this is the situation of spying.

Now, we have people that get caught and are declared as traitors, spies and so on. They are kept not always because they are immoral but because they are simply victim of "all will balance since everyone will catch everyone's spies". Looking at each element of the problem, is it moral? No. Looking at the whole, it is the more moral you can get.

So the question here is how can we get the more moral possible. How? By making that such machiavelist politics are impossible, like when some protection mechanism were instaured where everyone would be stuck in. The goal of these protection mechanism is to diminish the role of machiavelism in global balance. So if there isn't single mechanism in place, spies may all be imprisoned... But here are some ways, which can be international arrangements or treaties as Geneva's "Laws on War Measures":

1- Interdiction of capital sentence for spying

2- Exchanges of caught spies from both sides

3- Agreement to let go spies under certain conditions (when possible)

4- Agreement to let go all spies after a war/confrontation

5- Include liberation of spies as a condition to certain things

6- God knows what else

These were my 2 cents ;)

[Sneakgab]

Obviously if someone is forced to work for someone then if they go against them it is not treachery because they were not loyal to them

So in other words: If some lowly Iraq soldier/military figure betrays Saddam, then it's probably not treachery because he probably never willingly fought for him in the first place...