Salty

iTrader: (14)

First of all the geneva convention 'backbone' was written before your daddy was just a twinkle in your grandpa's eye so lets not get into how it applies today. This thread was originally about an extremely anti-american/biased article.

Here's my question to you... How would you feel if a bunch of taliban soldiers were shooting a .50cal machine gun at you, yet you couldn't shoot your .50cal directly back at them because it would be a war crime? yes it's a war crime to actually initiate direct fires with a .50cal or higher at a human. it has to be structural or indirect fields of fire. So what's the difference in time of war regarding bullet size and caliber? if i shoot you with a 5.56mm, 7.62mm or howitzer aren't you dead anyway or going to die?

Yes, if you've read and apply the convention it's full of catch22's. Why do we have the geneva convention when our enemies don't have similar laws and are allowed to play dirty? try not to quote a bunch of wise/famous people please (i'd rather hear your words) and try not to say "well that's why we're "civil americans" and that's what makes us a more "civil country" because there's NOTHING civil about war...so why can't we get our hands a bit dirty when our enemies are waste deep in war crimes based on the GC? Do you think the terrorists were interpreting the GC during 9/11 and maybe had second thoughts about landing the planes due to paragraph 10, line 54?

I want to know how YOU feel with your OWN PERSONAL thoughts if you were in that situation.

IsurehopeaModlocksthisthread

MonkeyAB

iTrader: (1)

I'm only responding because you asked. I may be wrong here, but I'm pretty sure the Geneva Convention was written after WWII, which makes it dated, but not antiquated. If I was getting shot at with .50 caliber bullets I'd return fire, but it wouldn't be a few weeks later. I agree that there's nothing civil about war, which is why we should not go around starting them. You asked what I believe, so here you go.

I believe that we (USA) should be citizens of the world, not bullies of it.

I believe that every empire will fall, including ours, and we should conduct our affairs in a less arrogant manner.

I believe violence should be avoided if at all possible.

That's all I want to say. I won't post in this thread again.

andyC

iTrader: (8)

No no no! This is a good thread with interesting viewpoints.

To lock this thread would be un-american.

Salty

iTrader: (14)

LOL:banana:

Salty

iTrader: (14)

Good points and i agree with you fully!

I assume you understand what im saying too. The fact that you fired that .50 just put you on the list for an Article 15 and potential general court marshall BTW for other article violations. You're now hated by every protesting anti-american, are labeled a "baby killer" and are discharged unbecoming because you were protecting yourself. how does it feel to go home an "unbecoming hero" because you didn't play by the rules of war (what an oxymoron that is, huh?)

Here's my point: People don't want another vietnam for a lot of different reasons. A lot of americans want their cake and eat it too. they want it to be a "in & out conflict" yet we're not on the same playing field as the enemy and are very limited. Even with our vast technology we're not on the same field of play because it's only as good as it's operator and we can only go so far with it.

you see what im saying? A lot of court marshalls were served during vietnam that violated the GC and other UCMJ laws, yet the extremely brilliant VC used outstanding guerilla warfare tactics down to women, children and poop covered sharpened sticks. If we used a lot more of those tactics and were on the EXACT same field of play then maybe it would have turned out better for the USA then and perhaps Osma would be in our custody today.

It's all about liberal americans wanting to hold hands, stupid politicans, checks and balances and that cherry "butter bar" LT that insists on playing by the rules during time of war (eventhough they hate it) because he had all the responsibility on his shoulders and wants to be a general someday. i've seen it first hand...

FUNKED1

You guys are confusing Iraq and Afghanistan. If this thread was a horse it would be taken out and shot.

psoper

The thing is, our guys wouldn't be there getting shot at in the first place if our commander in chimp had scrambled fighters to intercept the 4 hijacked planes on 9-11 instead of reading a book about goats to 3rd graders...

The worst thing about all of this is that Halliburton, Bechtel, and a buch of oil companies- all W's buddies are profitting hugely from everything that's been done since then.

Sisqo- I don't know how you can't see this- your buddies are being killed so these fat cats can get richer, nothing at all to do with bringing democracy to the middle east, much less making Americans any safer.

if I was in your boots I'd be seriously pissed.

That is the REAL crime.

Salty

iTrader: (14)

Ok this debate has crashed and burned.. people can't stay on the original topic. And im pissed and happy at the same time. You brought up one of the reasons why im pissed.

FUNKED1

ROFLMAO

For You!

Group B

iTrader: (3)

psoper

this beats that

FUNKED1

mmboost

iTrader: (2)

On one hand, yes, they are separate nations. But, I think that's where the confusion ends. I believe people often put them in the same boat when speaking out against the recent military actions because without 9/11 there would be no war in Iraq. The current administration thrives on fear. (a.k.a Verc's stupid liberal strategy). Without a propaganda (and I mean that in a pure way, not derogatorally) filled with messages of fear, I think Bush's approval ratings would have plummetted. I'd dare to even believe that many Republicans would have labelled the current administration to be "war mongering" were they not motivated by fear.

I hate being motivated by fear. Nothing causes more irrational behavior and disaterous endgames than fear. There is no end to it. First Afghanistan (fear that the Al Qaeda would strike again if the Taliban wasn't removed) and then Iraq (fear of Saddam's nonexistant WMD) and what's next? How long will we fear Syria, or Iran or North Korea? Etc. All our leaders need to do is find a stragety to bring another international (or even national) entity under the same wave of fear, and the decision to dominate it will be approved. The worst part about fear is that it almost always support an "end justifies the means" attitude. You can see this in Verc's "that's only to lead the masses of ignorant people into supporting the war". And if we make the US a little safer for a little while, then that's OK? At what point is the price of disregarding intrinsic american values going to become too high?

How long will people allow fear to be their god? Liberals might just be stupid. But were not driven by fear. We know the world won't be all nice and happy and we'll all be good friends yippee! forever and ever. But we do know that "kill or be killed" accomplishes nothing but killing people and making yourself a target. Living with hope only in your own, limited control over your own, limited universe is a frightening, hopeless existance. No wonder conservatives thrive on fear.


jason

FUNKED1

Jason, MonkeyAB was specifically talking about WMD, which had nothing to do with Enduring Freedom which is where the "3000 murdered" allegedly happened. That was my point.

I think tying Iraq and Afghanistan together is a mistake. Afghanistan was attacked because that's where Al Qaeda was based, the people who did USS Cole, Khobar Towers bombing, Kenya US embassy bombing, Tanzania US embassy bombing, WTC 1993 bombing, helped Aidid's goons bring down Blackhawks, and of course 9/11. It was a no brainer.

Iraq is a different thing completely, either a misguided search for WMD, some kind of preventitive nation-building exercise, or else an out-and-out oil grab, depending on who you believe. But even the hawks admit there was no link between Saddam and 9/11, and there's very little to show that Iraq had anything to do with Al Qaeda at all.

I think the Afghanistan operation was appropriate and I wish we had spent $87B there instead of Iraq. (Or better yet, give the $87B back to the people who earned it or use it to pay down the national debt.) Yes Saddam was bad, but I don't think there was a significant risk in letting him be until he did something stupid enough to generate widespread NATO and UN support for going in and taking him out.

BADWRX

iTrader: (5)

I'm backing Eric on this one.

The war in Iraq was right, for all of the wrong reasons. Bush did not lie...but he sold the wrong idea. We were wasting BILLIONS of dollars on MIO ops in the gulf inspecting stupid ships suspecting of smuggling Iraqi oil. Saddam was the second coming of Hitler, and he was ignoring international sanctions.

THE FRENCHEIS AND KRAUTS HAD IT RIGHT? PSOPER...you are an ignoramous! You obviously havn't been paying attention to the the very recent news...the Frenchies, Russians, Germans and countless others were on Saddam's dole. He was giving them oil vouchers to oppose the war. WORTH BILLIONS! Fool...

Tennant (Spelling) at the CIA needs to be fired. It was bad intelligence. Nobody lied to anybody...you communist *******s. Since Bush is at the top, he is where the accountability chain stops. If he would stop worrying about screwing up our society with Illegal Aliens for his big corperations, he may be able to get to the bottom of the Iraq affair. The whole WMD argument for the war was a bad strategy. Saddam had to fall, but we should have sold the war on human rights, and sanction violation issues.

By the way...aren't you idiots glad that our fighting men are dying while TAKING THE FIGHT TO THE ENEMY? I sure as hell am. I hate to see my fellow servicemembers killed in Iraq, but that is what we do. This is a chess game of global proportion. I am glad to see Al Queda and Anser Al Islam fockers getting smoked in Iraq and Afganistan, instead of in the USA. What we did in Iraq was level the playing field. We know that the crazy rags would all head to Iraq in droves to fight the oppressors and infadels, and it is there that our Apaches, Kiowa Warriors, Tanks, and BRAVE FIGHTING men are filling them full of DU! Yes DEPLETED URANIUM...what a great substance!

I hate Pinko liberals...I am SOOOOOOOOO Glad that I am in Virginia, where true Americans are the majority, and not the underspoken minory that they are in the Bay.