|
None are more hopelessly enslaved (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| LAdazeNYnights |
| quote: | Originally posted by Sushipunk
I don't either. Do not care.
But, which do you think is right? The international/political issue is kinda what I mean with this. |
Is the law really that fuzzy in this regard? There must be rules set by international bodies about how to deal with crimes committed by off-duty soldiers when abroad.
I do think he should be tried in Afghanistan, but under the watchful eye of the rest of the world (as would happen if that were the case). Russell suggested (rightfully) that their justice system is totally ed, but for this sort of case I think that a lot of pressure would be put on them to act decently and provide him with a fair trial.
If he's tried by the US, I don't think he should be executed (I simply don't believe in it...) but I do think he should be severely punished. I don't have all the answers... |
|
|
| srussell0018 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Sushipunk
War crimes are pretty specific, by law. To be pardoned from them requires a fair few factors. Factors that don't include wandering off, alone, with night vision equipment, and shooting 16 people without being given orders to do so.
The "orders to do so" part is especially important, here. |
I'm sorry, but pretty much every point in this post is wrong. They're not pretty specific by law, nobody said anything about him being pardoned from them, and they would be considered "war crimes" regardless of whether he was ordered to do so or not. |
|
|
| srussell0018 |
I'm going to back to sleep. I just woke up from a nightmare where I was wanted for murder, possessed the world's only lightsaber, got caught and was surrounded my cops, cut my head off with the lightsaber thinking it was a dream and I'd just wake up, and then proceeded to not wake up while the same event replayed like 5 times even though I was then aware that I wouldn't wake up.
Stuck in an infinite loop :wtf:
My point: He should be tried in an international court which handles war crimes. The end. |
|
|
| LAdazeNYnights |
| quote: | Originally posted by srussell0018
I'm going to back to sleep. I just woke up from a nightmare where I was wanted for murder, possessed the world's only lightsaber, got caught and was surrounded my cops, cut my head off with the lightsaber thinking it was a dream and I'd just wake up, and then proceeded to not wake up while the same event replayed like 5 times even though I was then aware that I wouldn't wake up.
Stuck in an infinite loop :wtf:
My point: He should be tried in an international court which handles war crimes. The end. |
I don't think it's a war crime though. You seem to think it is. Maybe you're right. Is this even still considered a war? Aren't we onto the 'occupation' phase by now?
I've had the Take Shelter nightmare twice now. Pretty good . I need to get to sleep too.... |
|
|
| aNYthing |
I'm curious how this sort of behavior would have been treated during WW2.
Not condoning the act, which is attrocious, but war was never about being PC... but killing civilians was never "out of scope" at any point in any of the armed conflicts of the past.
I think that if we look at these wars of recent, the pattern of "reduce civilian casualties" is part of the reasons why wars are so prolonged and costly.
Just look at what the Allied forces did to Dresden. The barbaric nature of war, in itself, must serve as a deterrent from further attacks. History is full of like this - barbarism.
We'd like to think ourselves to be civilized, yet the reality is that most of the time enemy ISN'T. Do I think civies deserved it? Absolutely not.
But.
Had Taliban not ed with US, they'd still be happy stoning rape victims, blowing up historic Buddah sculptures, and just living it up in their 13th century hole.
Well, you can't make an omlet without having few cracked eggs running around shooting innocent people. Or so it seems. |
|
|
| Lilith |
| quote: | Originally posted by Sushipunk
But, which do you think is right? The international/political issue is kinda what I mean with this. |
Doesn't matter what's right, the fact is the US government can't just simply hand over a serving soldier on deployment to whatever passes for a judicial system in a country they're currently occupying.
All it really highlights is that the US keeps its soldiers in-country for far too long when they should have been removed due to fatigue, injury and stress- on what their politicians term 'police actions'. The fundamental problem with using soldiers as police is that they're not trained to be police, they don't issue parking tickets, break up domestics, arrest drunks and all the other problems of society.
You deploy soldiers and they have but one solution at their disposal that they're trained to perform, which is to make everything you're pointing them at dead and broken.
Seriously, take any of you guys who are professionals in our society and throw you into another job, in another country that is completely out of your scope to perform and there will be little wonderment why you fail. |
|
|
| Lews |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lilith
Doesn't matter what's right, the fact is the US government can't just simply hand over a serving soldier on deployment to whatever passes for a judicial system in a country they're currently occupying.
All it really highlights is that the US keeps its soldiers in-country for far too long when they should have been removed due to fatigue, injury and stress- on what their politicians term 'police actions'. The fundamental problem with using soldiers as police is that they're not trained to be police, they don't issue parking tickets, break up domestics, arrest drunks and all the other problems of society.
You deploy soldiers and they have but one solution at their disposal that they're trained to perform, which is to make everything you're pointing them at dead and broken.
Seriously, take any of you guys who are professionals in our society and throw you into another job, in another country that is completely out of your scope to perform and there will be little wonderment why you fail. |
All of these comments. |
|
|
| Sushipunk |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lilith
Doesn't matter what's right, the fact is the US government can't just simply hand over a serving soldier on deployment to whatever passes for a judicial system in a country they're currently occupying.
All it really highlights is that the US keeps its soldiers in-country for far too long when they should have been removed due to fatigue, injury and stress- on what their politicians term 'police actions'. The fundamental problem with using soldiers as police is that they're not trained to be police, they don't issue parking tickets, break up domestics, arrest drunks and all the other problems of society.
You deploy soldiers and they have but one solution at their disposal that they're trained to perform, which is to make everything you're pointing them at dead and broken.
Seriously, take any of you guys who are professionals in our society and throw you into another job, in another country that is completely out of your scope to perform and there will be little wonderment why you fail. |
Yeah, good points Lil, I can't deny that.
Is the US still 'technically' occupying Afghanistan though? I thought they had (for the most part) withdrawn? Though I guess that doesn't make too much difference, regarding what you said. |
|
|
| LAdazeNYnights |
| quote: | Originally posted by Sushipunk
Is the US still 'technically' occupying Afghanistan though? I thought they had (for the most part) withdrawn? Though I guess that doesn't make too much difference, regarding what you said. |
The official US position on this is that the 'in up quota' has not yet been met. |
|
|
| Sushipunk |
| quote: | Originally posted by LAdazeNYnights
The official US position on this is that the 'in up quota' has not yet been met. |
I read that in Obama's voice, and it was quite satisfying. |
|
|
| Redd |
| quote: | Originally posted by Ian
Take the shootings in Norway, if he wasn't white then there'd have been a massive backlash, more than there was and he wouldn't be in a mental institution. |
just fyi; Breivik is not in a mental institution, and is undergoing a second psyche evaluation (in prison) by a new set of psychologist because of the controversial decision of the first one. |
|
|
| Zharen |
| Whoa, didn't know the COR could still make good political discourse. I am enamored. |
|
|
|
|
