Originally posted by ampmaster: The American revolution was set off by taxes, though the incident you refer to was british soldiers not cops, there is a diffrence, Cops attempt to detain you(I say attempt they will shoot you if they feel threatened) and soldiers are trained to shoot first and not bother to ask questions
Time for another round of "repeat the obvious, loudly and slowly, for Ampmaster". The taxes caused the protests. The repression of the protests caused the revolution. It's called the cycle of violence - for numerous examples, see any military action carried out with revenge as a motive.
Soldiers are trained to shoot on sight? What the hell unit are you in? The last time I checked, soldiers were expected to at least attempt to differentiate between combatants and civilians. Failing to do so is not only immoral, it's militarily stupid. For reference, see "Vietnam".
Originally posted by Hydrok: making claims that the President could launch a nuclear weapon tommorow while possible, is not at all probable or plausable.
You can keep saying it, but that won't make it true. Again, quote a source, or stop making ridiculous claims.
I'm not saying it's likely that Dubya will drop the bomb tomorrow - just that there is no systemic obstacle to him doing so. Which was, if you recall, the reason you gave for the US being better qualified than other countries to have nukes. Wasn't true the first time you said, ain't true now.
quote:
Again all I'm trying to relay is that your attempting the lowest of all tactics, ones the republicans perfected during the 04 election season, and the democrats are just now getting the hang of... 'How bad do we need to scare people to get them to join our side'
No one is right in this, both republicans and democrats are being babies by playing to the fear of Americans... and your only falling for it, hook, line, and indeed, sinker... Congrats, you have allowed the politicians to make you a fool.
Uh, what the hell are you talking about? All I've ever done is counter your erroneous argument with cited facts, and then (repeatedly) asked for you to do the same. Keep throwing tantrums, I'll still be here when you're done.
It occurred to me that the feats you've claimed for yourself would require a good deal more self-control than you've demonstrated thus far. Just sharing my observation of another chink in your facade. Carry on.
Indeed, God forbid we question cops shooting civilians - surely the American Revolution wasn't sparked by any such incident?
The American revolution was set off by taxes, though the incident you refer to was british soldiers not cops, there is a diffrence, Cops attempt to detain you(I say attempt they will shoot you if they feel threatened) and soldiers are trained to shoot first and not bother to ask questions
"The very existence of flamethrowers proves that sometime, somewhere, someone said to themselves, "You know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm just not close enough to get the job done"."
LOAC training is a part of international law... but LOAC itself is a product of international law, the US Supreme Court, and Article 6 of the constitution... See LOAC isn't just international law... there are further regulations inside of it that is partial only to the US.
LOAC takes international law and treaties into account but then further dictates COAs based on US law... the Geneva Conventions didn't produce LOAC, the US did, we use LOAC to encompass international and domestic law into one source for easy one stop shopping.
But all of this is relatively irrelevant, because your argument on nuclear weapons holds no water... making claims that the President could launch a nuclear weapon tommorow while possible, is not at all probable or plausable.
Again all I'm trying to relay is that your attempting the lowest of all tactics, ones the republicans perfected during the 04 election season, and the democrats are just now getting the hang of... 'How bad do we need to scare people to get them to join our side'
No one is right in this, both republicans and democrats are being babies by playing to the fear of Americans... and your only falling for it, hook, line, and indeed, sinker... Congrats, you have allowed the politicians to make you a fool.
Originally posted by Hydrok: Did you even read what you quoted?
Yes, I did - especially the part that said [I paraphrase]: LOAC is a part of public international law (your cite). "International", see? Meaning "not just the US". So, again, I ask, what part of the document you linked to did I mischaracterize?
Originally posted by Hydrok: Fuck this, your a god damn nut job... you have no perception of reality what so ever.
Ah, yes, the debator's master-stroke - name-calling.
quote:
Also, I love how you mis-characterize the actual LOAC document with training on said document... and your telling me I cant read?
Can you quote the part of the document I mischaracterized? And, no, I'm merely observing the fact of your apparent troubles in translating information from the written word. In essence, I'm saying you can't read well.
quote:
And I'm not here to debate how well prisoners are mistreated... I could frankly give a flying fuck about any of them... I go through worse shit in basic training, AIT, and Survival school then any of those jihadist butt-fucks will ever go through... the crap that happened at Abu-Graib is the equivlent of a frat party to me. I dont give a SHIT about them, any of them, because if they were dumb enough to get caught doing *something* then they probably deserve to be there... I revert back to my scenario that you have yet to answer... because you know you would ultimatly have to make the same decision or die.
Yeah, I would. So what?
Oh, and you've met every detainee? You've read all their files? You know they were all caught red-handed doing "something" (Hey look! That guy's breathing! Lock him up!)?
More of your oddly-desperate bragging - why are you so obsessed about whether a bunch of people you don't know think you're a badass? "Methinks the lady doth protest too much!" Oh, and what frat are you attending these parties at? Gamma Alpha Assrape?
You don't care about people being mistreated by the US? And you wonder why people don't like Americans. Again to Chris Rock - "You think you're better than someone because you came out a pussy in Detroit?"
quote:
Diallo was not complying with the instructions of the police officers, there for when making a motion that was not directed by said police officers they fired on him... he was shot so many times because in training, if you feel threatened you shoot till the person is down or your out of ammo... he just took a little while to fall to the pavement is all. Same with that kid with the toy gun... and all the play up by fucktards like yourself is the problem with america...
Indeed, God forbid we question cops shooting civilians - surely the American Revolution wasn't sparked by any such incident?
quote:
This whole LOAC thing is Americas document, good ol' USA, no one else has or trains the same piece of paper... this is obvious because no other nation has a US Supreme court (checks and balances anyone?)
What are you talking about? Where does your site-of-choice talk about the US Supreme Court?
I love training pieces of paper - can yours roll over? Mine are having trouble with that.
Originally posted by ampmaster: On the canadian thing that's called an accident you idiot we don't jail people for making a freakin mistake!
Oh my God, how can so much ignorance reside in just one person? I don't live in the US, most of my knowledge of US law comes from "Law & Order", but even I know about "criminally negligent homicide". To translate for ampmaster: Um, yeah you do.
quote:
The reason he hasn't been over ruled on those is Iraq is legal, the crap at Gitmo is a conspiracy theory, and secret CIA prisions please I know 10 year olds that know that's a crock of bullshit
Ah-ha! At last, the nub of the problem. Ampmaster, you simply have to stop relying on 10-year-olds for all your information.
There's too many stories to link here, so I'll just ask you to Google "CIA secret prisons", and take your pick from the Washington Post, ABC, CBC, BBC, MSNBC - hell, even Fox is covering the story.
As for the Iraq war being legal, on what basis? And on the Gitmo "conspiracy theories" - well, why not let neutral, third-party human rights groups freely tour the place, and thereby clear the air?
quote:
here is a diffrence the US military does not try to kill civilians, a terroist attack is directly aimed at civilians so any attacks by the insurgents on legit military target are not terroist attacks, just "attacks" now if they set off a bomb at say a voting stand or a market that would be terroism(and they've done that)
At what point does a high likelyhood of civilian death override the importance of the intended target? You could spray bullets into a crowd, injuring many - are you relieved from responsibilty because you were aiming at a purse-snatcher?
quote:
we act on intelligence some times it's wrong and nocombatents die but most of the tome it's right and thats some more bad guys taking up residence in the land of FUBAR.
Uh-huh - any sources on how much "most of the time" is?
Fuck this, your a god damn nut job... you have no perception of reality what so ever.
Also, I love how you mis-characterize the actual LOAC document with training on said document... and your telling me I cant read? Where is that irony bell you love to ring?
And I'm not here to debate how well prisoners are mistreated... I could frankly give a flying fuck about any of them... I go through worse shit in basic training, AIT, and Survival school then any of those jihadist butt-fucks will ever go through... the crap that happened at Abu-Graib is the equivlent of a frat party to me. I dont give a SHIT about them, any of them, because if they were dumb enough to get caught doing *something* then they probably deserve to be there... I revert back to my scenario that you have yet to answer... because you know you would ultimatly have to make the same decision or die.
Diallo was not complying with the instructions of the police officers, there for when making a motion that was not directed by said police officers they fired on him... he was shot so many times because in training, if you feel threatened you shoot till the person is down or your out of ammo... he just took a little while to fall to the pavement is all. Same with that kid with the toy gun... and all the play up by fucktards like yourself is the problem with america...
I used to think like you, dont get me wrong, hell I'm even a regestered democrat, but you all get so caught up in your little stories and panic attacks that I cant stand to be around them anymore.
This whole LOAC thing is Americas document, good ol' USA, no one else has or trains the same piece of paper... this is obvious because no other nation has a US Supreme court (checks and balances anyone?)
Originally posted by Hydrok: And to be honest, I think that chin link cages are the of the least concern as far as human rights violations go.
No doubt there - I've seen the Abu Gharib photos (at least the tamer ones - Congress wouldn't release many of them because they were "obscene"). And Abu Gharib was run, right up until the scandal broke, by a general brought from Gitmo to "Gitmo-ize" Iraqi detainee centers - in other words, to make Abu Gharib look like Gitmo. Considering how secretive the US is about Gitmo in comparison to Iraqi prisons, I can only conclude that Abu Gharib is a pale imitation of the horrors in Guantanamo Bay.
quote:
Can you at least agree that congress is more to blame for the Iraq war than anyone else... I mean, how thick did they have to be to sign a war powers act without any pre-determined objectives?
Yeah, they screwed up all right - by trusting the leader of their party. Dubya can't have it both ways - he's the leader of the US, for better or (thus far) for worse. He can't claim the powers of the Presidency, and then avoid the lion's share of the blame for his use of them.
quote:
Then I also think that it should be fairly apparent by now that the president can't just launch a nuclear strike whenever he feels like it... so all the threats of nuclear winter from guy are pretty unfounded.
For God's sake, how is it apparent? You have yet to post one (1) link that contradicts my source, which stated that the President and the Secretary of Defense are all that's needed to launch a nuclear strike. You can't win this one by simply muddying the waters, so kindly stop wasting everyone's time.
quote:
or the guy in NY that got shot 34 times while reaching for his wallet... perception is everything.
Amalou Diallo was shot 41 times (ask Springsteen), an event that was found to be the result of a culture of violent racism within the NYPD. Do you really want to use that as your example?
Originally posted by ampmaster: True enough the insurgents from Iraq get that but the Jihadists from other nations are just terroists
Whoa, wait a minute. You just said that:
quote:
a terroist attack is directly aimed at civilians so any attacks by the insurgents on legit military target are not terroist attacks
Now you're saying that any attack by a foreign fighter in Iraq is nessecarily a "terrorist" attack, regardless of intended target?
I should just stop replying to ampmaster - give him 10 minutes and he contradicts himself, because he doesn't even understand his own opinions. I could just sit back and watch.
Originally posted by ampmaster: Some more on the Geneva conventions it's been US understanding that if the enemy didn't sign the Geneva Conventions they don't apply
Who in the US has that understanding? Because anyone who does hasn't read the Conventions.
Article 5:Should any doubt arise as to whether persons, having committed a belligerent act and having fallen into the hands of the enemy, belong to any of the categories enumerated in Article 4, such persons shall enjoy the protection of the present Convention until such time as their status has been determined by a competent tribunal.
Therefore, the Conventions apply to everyone until determined otherwise. And if Dubya alone constitutes a "competent tribunal", then the definition becomes so watered-down as to make the treaties meaningless. You can have it that way if you like, but don't whine about "mistreatment" of US captives - I'm sure the head of whatever group captured them will have decided, as a "competent tribunal", that Geneva don't apply there neither.
Originally posted by Hydrok: well thanks for proving your ignorance... LOAC is a seperate entity from the Geneva Conventions all together. America didn't sign on all the provisions of the Geneva convention... LOAC is the standard we hold ourselves too... the Geneva COnvention is international.
Now the Iraq war is over... there is no iraqi army to defeat, there is no more Saddam Hussein... there is no more war, we are cleaning up... there is no other country fighting us with a declaration of war. Again your ignorance is blatantly clear.
Anybody seen "Cool Hand Luke"? You know that scene where Luke's boxing, and getting his ass kicked, but he keeps getting back up, until everyone including his opponent is yelling at him to "stay down" because it's pathetic how badly he's being beaten? That's Hydrok right about now.
From the site you linked to:A part of public international law, LOAC regulates the conduct of armed hostilities. It also aims to protect civilians, prisoners of war, the wounded, sick, and shipwrecked. LOAC applies to international armed conflicts and in the conduct of military operations and related activities in armed conflict, however such conflicts are characterized.
LOAC training is a treaty obligation of the United States under provisions of the 1949 Geneva Conventions.
LOAC comes from both customary international law and treaties. Customary international law, based on practice that nations have come to accept as legally required, establishes the traditional rules that govern the conduct of military operations in armed conflict. Article VI of the US Constitution states that treaty obligations of the United States are the “supreme law of the land,” and the US Supreme Court has held that international law, to include custom, are part of US law. This means that treaties and agreements the United States enters into enjoy equal status as laws passed by Congress and signed by the President.
Did you read it this time? It says that LOAC is part of public international law, and only part of US domestic law as a treaty signed by the United States. It also says that LOAC applies to all military operations, whether or not they are characterized as war.
For God's sake, at least read your irrelevant links before you post them. That's 2 kinds of stupid right there.
True enough the insurgents from Iraq get that but the Jihadists from other nations are just terroists
Yeah platoon is a good descritption that's the type of shit that happened in the bush(vietnam) little babysans and mamasans pakin AKs waiting for a Marine to turn his back then pow, one dead jarhead. Similer deal now in iraq
"The very existence of flamethrowers proves that sometime, somewhere, someone said to themselves, "You know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm just not close enough to get the job done"."
I suppose I was talking more about the insurgents. They're entitled to fair treatment under Geneva.
And yes, I suppose I can blame Congress for not busting Bush for ignoring the sixty day limit.
As for your scenario, Hydrok, I can't really say what I'd do. Most likely, I'd shoot to disable in the even that the kid is just deaf or stupid. Of course, if he really was packing a bomb, my team would be dead in the next instant, so I suppose a killing shot would be the best course of action, especially since he was warned.
That sort of thing reminds me too much of Platoon...
True POWs get more under the Geneva Conventions, but even terrorists have the right to fair and humane treatment.
But Terroists have been dfined by nayional policy as criminals and therefore the Geneva Conventions and LOAC don't apply to them. Terroism is not an act if war it is a criminal act.
quote:
But how would you respond to my scenario... and if I shoot that kid am I murdering a child? Think back to that SWAT team that shot the 6th grader, or the guy in NY that got shot 34 times while reaching for his wallet... perception is everything.
I'd shoot that kid my people come first, I'd tell the translator to warn him that "if he doesn't back off we'll shoot him" but if he ignores that warning and keeps coming I'd blow him away. It's not killing a kid it's protecting my people who I have responsabilities to, Specificly to bring them home alive.
"The very existence of flamethrowers proves that sometime, somewhere, someone said to themselves, "You know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm just not close enough to get the job done"."
Topics 
