The Iraq / war on terror thread

[jarmo]

Hey, if you want a forum with all left wing pantie wearin opinions.

If that means we don't have to put up with narrowminded posts, you bet.



/jarmo

[Genesis]

Hey, if you want a forum with all left wing pantie wearin opinions.
let her rip.
might make for very boring conversation though.

I dont know anything about Charitycase's 'past',
 If he or she was banned in the past for legitimate reasons.
All Im seeing in the way of insult / opinions is an equal, albeit juvenile playing field.
Dont throw rocks in a glass house I guess Im saying.

Whazza matter shades? Side tracking the rights issue? Bush got ur tongue? 

[Surfrider]

geneva convention applies to 'uniformed' soldiers.

The Geneva Convention:

# A series of international agreements first signed in 1906 to provide for the humane treatment of the wounded, prisoners of war, and civilians in time of war. Provides for the better treatment of the wounded in war and forbids any misuse of the Red Cross flag. [GRL. RE]

# A convention following WWII which discussed the rules for war, the boundaries not to be crossed, such as chemical weaponry, and genocide. As well, it addresses the rights of non-combatants. Nuclear weapons basically violate this convention, and this is being brought to the ICJ for ajudication.

# Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees of July 28, 1951

"Ever read it? guess not."
Lot of wise asses on this forum, Is it part of the criteria?

Go screw urself shades.

Actually Shades is right about the Geneva convention in that not all fighters fall under it.  However, the problem is that the Bush administration was not giving preliminary hearings to these people to determine their status.

[SLCPUNK]

geneva convention applies to 'uniformed' soldiers.

The Geneva Convention:

# A series of international agreements first signed in 1906 to provide for the humane treatment of the wounded, prisoners of war, and civilians in time of war. Provides for the better treatment of the wounded in war and forbids any misuse of the Red Cross flag. [GRL. RE]

# A convention following WWII which discussed the rules for war, the boundaries not to be crossed, such as chemical weaponry, and genocide. As well, it addresses the rights of non-combatants. Nuclear weapons basically violate this convention, and this is being brought to the ICJ for ajudication.

# Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees of July 28, 1951

"Ever read it? guess not."
Lot of wise asses on this forum, Is it part of the criteria?

Go screw urself shades.

Actually Shades is right about the Geneva convention in that not all fighters fall under it.  However, the problem is that the Bush administration was not giving preliminary hearings to these people to determine their status.

Personally I think the (soon to be) sentence is a bit too harsh. But on the other hand she was undermining our standing in the Muslim World by taking part in these acts. We claim to be humane while ignoring the GC at the same time. These photos leaked out were huge in recruiting future terrorists. It was exactly the kind of thing Osama wanted (second to us invading Iraq, like he predicted.)

[Kitano]

She broke the law, she is responsible for whatever punishment she gets.  I feel sorry for her, she's young and dumb and she has probably ruined her life.

Isn't she pregnant?

[Sterlingdog]

I believe she already had her child.

She should suffer the consequences of her actions.  I know they claimed she was an easily led personality and was trying to get the approval of her boyfriend, but that's really no excuse.  I just feel sorry for her child if she does time for this. 

[Dr. Blutarsky]

If you are willing to strap a bomb to yourself to kill an American or anyone who may agree with the Iraqi Government and do not care if you kill innocent people, possibly children in the process, I think the Geneva convention rules just might not apply to that person.

[SLCPUNK]

If you are willing to strap a bomb to yourself to kill an American or anyone who may agree with the Iraqi Government and do not care if you kill innocent people, possibly children in the process, I think the Geneva convention rules just might not apply to that person.

You can't use rules only when you feel like it. That would go directly against what the USA stands for.

Not everybody in that jail is/was guilty.

[gilld1]

So the GC would not have applied to Japanese Kamikaze pilots? Not your typical soldiers were they?

So the figure head for the abuse scandal or the scapegoat is a semi-retarded Private?  Meanwhile, the men who gave the orders just got thier promotions today.

[SLCPUNK]

So the figure head for the abuse scandal or the scapegoat is a semi-retarded Private?  Meanwhile, the men who gave the orders just got thier promotions today.

Funny how that works 'eh?

[SLCPUNK]

RT HOOD, Texas (Reuters) - Lynndie England, the U.S. soldier pictured holding a leash to a naked Iraqi inmate at Abu Ghraib prison in a scandal that prompted global outrage, was sentenced on Tuesday to three years in prison and given a dishonorable discharge.

In sentencing testimony just hours before, England, who had faced a maximum nine years behind bars, apologized for her actions and said she remained an American patriot.
.
.
The former West Virginia chicken factory worker blamed her involvement on Charles Graner, the abuse ringleader and father of her child.

"I was embarrassed because I was used by Private Graner; I didn't realize it at the time," she said, sometimes pausing at length to gather her thoughts. "I trusted him and I loved him."

England's mother showed up briefly with the 11-month-old baby in the military courtroom for the first time, and the Army reservist talked at length about how the child, who bears a striking resemblance to Graner, had changed her life.

[Holy War]

They never cease to amaze me.. I think he is just enjoying having a lend of us all and enjoying a laugh.. surely he can't be serious..?

No tongue in cheek here.  I'm 100% serious.

[Holy War]

My problem with what went on in Abu Ghraib is what some of the soldiers did seemed more like extreme hazing than any form of actual interrogation.? I don't think using just any prisoner in some lewd stunt is going to get us the information we need.

Many of harder-line Al-Qaeda rucruits are trained in resisting interrogation.? We need to take things to the limit of the law if needed, and if that doesn't work turn them over to an ally country that has more "options" available.

Jesus Christ

Reading that made my blood run cold.

U have to be 12 with idiotic ideas like that.

I really wonder sometimes

Sorry to offend your delicate sensibilities but why exactly does my statement make your blood run cold?? If anything, the savage brutality of those who the U.S. (and your own country) are fighting should be the main concern.

I'm not saying we should stoop to their level - which is more along the lines of cutting a person's head off on camera than any type of thorough interrogation.

Myself and others are often accused of being "armchair admirals."? The flipside of that coin are those that believe the we can and should somehow fight in an unrealistic, passivist way.? I've seen this mentality here many times.? Everything from the criticism of the U.S. marine "libererating an insurgent from his life" to the U.S. not fighting a "clean, normal war" when the atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nakasaki.

I'm not saying we should or need to take interrogation to the limits of the law across the board.? That was one of the problems I saw in Abu Ghraib, where it seemed everyone and anyone were subject.? But to not try and get often crucial information out of key prisoners by whatever means allowed is just foolish.? And suicidal.

[Sterlingdog]

Did I miss something?  At some point, was what England and her friends did supposed to be interrogation?  Because it sure looked like some young idiots with a little bit of authority humiliating people for thier own amusement.

I realize that some of you don't want to consider the prisoners people, but you don't know what they, as individuals, did.  You can't hold them responsible for every terrorist act in the world.  Maybe some of them are horrible evil people, but you can't condemn them all to the same punishment when they haven't all committed the same crime. 

[Holy War]

Did I miss something?? At some point, was what England and her friends did supposed to be interrogation?? Because it sure looked like some young idiots with a little bit of authority humiliating people for thier own amusement.

I realize that some of you don't want to consider the prisoners people, but you don't know what they, as individuals, did.? You can't hold them responsible for every terrorist act in the world.? Maybe some of them are horrible evil people, but you can't condemn them all to the same punishment when they haven't all committed the same crime.?

Is there an echo in here?  I could have sworn I just said virtually all of this...

[SLCPUNK]

My problem with what went on in Abu Ghraib is what some of the soldiers did seemed more like extreme hazing than any form of actual interrogation.  I don't think using just any prisoner in some lewd stunt is going to get us the information we need.

Many of harder-line Al-Qaeda rucruits are trained in resisting interrogation.  We need to take things to the limit of the law if needed, and if that doesn't work turn them over to an ally country that has more "options" available.

Jesus Christ

Reading that made my blood run cold.

U have to be 12 with idiotic ideas like that.

I really wonder sometimes

Myself and others are often accused of being "armchair admirals."  The flipside of that coin are those that believe the we can and should somehow fight in an unrealistic, passivist way.  I've seen this mentality here many times.  Everything from the criticism of the U.S. marine "libererating an insurgent from his life" to the U.S. not fighting a "clean, normal war" when the atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nakasaki.

Nobody here has said we should fight this passively.

Keep strawman back at your headquarters too, thanks.

[Holy War]

Nobody here has said we should fight this passively.

Keep strawman back at your headquarters too, thanks.

I swear if I had a dollar for everytime you used the word "strawman" I'd have a private jet on 24 hour standby.   

OK SLC, how should we - as in the U.S. miliatary and its allies - conduct interrogations of prisoners?

[SLCPUNK]

Nobody here has said we should fight this passively.

Keep strawman back at your headquarters too, thanks.

OK SLC, how should we - as in the U.S. miliatary and its allies - conduct interrogations of prisoners?

According to the Geneva Conventions.

[Holy War]

Nobody here has said we should fight this passively.

Keep strawman back at your headquarters too, thanks.

OK SLC, how should we - as in the U.S. miliatary and its allies - conduct interrogations of prisoners?

According to the Geneva Conventions.

And what of the circumstances where the Geneva Convention does not apply or doesn't work?

[SLCPUNK]

Nobody here has said we should fight this passively.

Keep strawman back at your headquarters too, thanks.

OK SLC, how should we - as in the U.S. miliatary and its allies - conduct interrogations of prisoners?

According to the Geneva Conventions.

And what of the circumstances where the Geneva Convention does not apply or doesn't work?

Such as?