Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Gunthr on December 05, 2005, 06:11:28 PM
-
No kidding, Saddam. That is because you are elderly, and you know with certainty that you won't suffer the extreme torture that makes death a mercy, as you and your rascal boys committed on men, women and children.
-
shut up. one word: dresden
quit taking it so personal.
-
Torture is the issue, not fire bombing.
I will take you down one peg, because you were not germain, and because you were insulting. This is the technique of those with deficient reasoning, and those who are imature.
-
The Dresden attack in WWII and Saddam's acts comitted on people in his country are dfferent.
Do you allude that they are the same thing?
This is actually a matter of history. I hope you are able to keep your mind more open for new information. I wish you the best in your career with the Navy.
-
Originally posted by VoiceOfThePast
When did torturing people (or firebombing them for that matter) become illegal? And if such a law exists, who enforces it?
Just like the Nazis, Saddam committed only one true Realpolitik crime, he lost the war.
That has to be one of the most stupid remarks I have seen on this BBS in a long time.
Obviously you lack quite a bit in your education.
-
Originally posted by VoiceOfThePast
When did torturing people (or firebombing them for that matter) become illegal? And if such a law exists, who enforces it?
Just like the Nazis, Saddam committed only one true Realpolitik crime, he lost the war.
The first Geneva Convention was signed in 1864 to protect the sick and wounded in war time. This first Geneva Convention was inspired by Henri Dunant, founder of the Red Cross. Ever since then, the Red Cross has played an integral part in the drafting and enforcement of the Geneva Conventions.
These included the 1899 treaties, concerning asphyxiating gases and expanding bullets. In 1907, 13 separate treaties were signed, followed in 1925 by the Geneva Gas Protocol, which prohibited the use of poison gas and the practice of bacteriological warfare.
In 1929, two more Geneva Conventions dealt with the treatment of the wounded and prisoners of war. In 1949, four Geneva Conventions extended protections to those shipwrecked at sea and to civilians.
The Hague Convention on the Protection of Cultural Property was signed in 1954, the United Nations Convention on Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Techniques followed in 1977, together with two Additional Protocols to the Geneva Conventions of 1949, extending their protections to civil wars.
Generally, the winners of the conflict enforce the law.
-
When did torturing people (or firebombing them for that matter) become illegal? And if such a law exists, who enforces it?
Just like the Nazis, Saddam committed only one true Realpolitik crime, he lost the war.
Last edited by VoiceOfThePast on 12-06-2005 at 01:46 AM
You seem to engage in relativism. Its obvious you haven't lived much. And that you don't appreciate it. Or, you are dismayed by what has taken place in history. I sincerely hope that you learn the difference between right and wrong. My guess is that your mom and dad didn't do such a good job on loving you, or giving you much of their time.
-
votp certainly seems like either a shade account or another person who was banned. Methinks it's simply a troll and a rather poor one at that.
-
This is the stupedist argument ever. WHy don't you just say the holucost never happened and defend Hitler and Japan's aggression as "just needing extra recources"
US troops are not on trial here, we try our own AND HAVE MANY TIMES SO FAR IN THIS WAR. We follow law of armed conflict or face punishment for it.
Sadam comitted among others crimes of genocide and he is answering for them in a joke of a trial.
-
VoiceOfThePast,
Unfortunately, I agree with you.
-
I think shades accounts and their owners are flaming examples of homosexuality.
-
Originally posted by Gunthr
You seem to engage in relativism. Its obvious you haven't lived much. And that you don't appreciate it. Or, you are dismayed by what has taken place in history. I sincerely hope that you learn the difference between right and wrong. My guess is that your mom and dad didn't do such a good job on loving you, or giving you much of their time.
that is one masterfully crafted counter aurguement.
-
I read through this thread but admit to being sort of lost.....
-
Well so far, VoiceOfThePast made an excellent point.
And instead of proving him wrong, many people immediately jumped to insulting him and his character.
It's 2nd grade debate skills.
When you can't possibly win, insult his mother.
-
but of course tho during the 80's when saddam was at the apex of his genocidal campaign and overtly contravening the geneva convention, he was coddled by the neocons and complicity was the course of the day. this belated moral outrage only further exposes the hypocrisy and moral vacuum in which the neocons dwell.
having powel commiserate at halabja was ironic to say the least.
-
Originally posted by VoiceOfThePast
"Law" has always been enforced by the gun, and the people with guns dictates the "Law". Always has, always will.
[ironic mode on] Wrong .... its the people with the "longest" gun who dictates the law [ironic mode off]. And write history, usually. These two things combined make reading and re-reading history very interesting.
-
Torque, howdy! :) I miss your F4U-1C and the Pony Express in the arena.
-
Originally posted by Torque
but of course tho during the 80's when saddam was at the apex of his genocidal campaign and overtly contravening the geneva convention, he was coddled by the neocons and complicity was the course of the day. this belated moral outrage only further exposes the hypocrisy and moral vacuum in which the neocons dwell.
You're right. Since nothing was done about it in the 80's, nothing should be done now or in the future.
Saddam was "coddled" all right, from about 1992-2002.
-
blah blah blah... I don't think "he" has access to this BBS anyway, so WTFC?
-
Voice of the Past guy is right. Might decides who's right, the law of the jungle is the only one that applies ultimately, always has been and allways will be like that. Just be happy that the apes with the biggest clubs now are benevolant ones.
Were law stops war begins. Many allied leaders would've been tried and found guilty of war crimes had the allies lost the war. General Lemay even said this before the war was over.
-
A note of interest on geneva conventions. Many of the military and intelligence personel who defected from DPRK and USSR in the '80s had no knowledge of the geneva conventions and the laws governing warfare.
You think their leaders wanted them to know that if they surrendered they would be treated well as POWs ?
-
""Law" has always been enforced by the gun, and the people with guns dictates the "Law". Always has, always will."
this much I agree with... seems odd when people who know this try to disarm their neighbors and themselves tho.
lazs
-
This is not moral relativism, but reality. I know that Saddam is the bad guy and that the US are the good guys in this conflict, but morals only apply if the good guys win. If Saddam had won none of this would have mattered.
The TRUTH exists. Take for example, one of Saddam's boys, the addicted one, who enjoyed feeding innocent people feet first into a plastic shredder.
I hope you don't believe that this act is not intrinsically wrong - so long as Saddam wins the war. That is relativism.
Kids who's parents don't teach them right from wrong are subject to this condition later on in life when they are adults. They become easily confused.
The observation that victors in war write the history books or that the powerful are able to impose their will on the weak doesn't change the fact that what is truley wrong, is wrong, no matter who may be the victor.
-
Originally posted by Gunthr
The TRUTH exists. Take for example, one of Saddam's boys, the addicted one, who enjoyed feeding innocent people feet first into a plastic shredder.
I hope you don't believe that this act is not intrinsically wrong - so long as Saddam wins the war. That is relativism.
That article that first put forth that story was never sustantiated. And it was supposedly Saddam who did it, not one of his sons.
-
Torture is the issue
Gunthr.... who will be held accountable for this... where does the buck stop..
"Multiple blunt force injuries. Abrasion in upper right forehead. Abrasion on right lower forehead above eyebrow. Multiple contusions on right cheek and lower nose, left upper forehead, back of head. Abrasions on chest, lower costal margin. Contusions on arm, elbow, forearm, wrist, upper inner arm, groin, inner thigh, right back of knee and calf, left calf, left lower leg. Cause of death was pulmonary embolism due to blunt force injuries."
http://action.aclu.org/torturefoia/released/102405/ this is only the tip of the FOIA iceburg..
Rumsfield says the buck stops with Lyndie England and other enlisted pee ons "a few bad apples" I think was his comment these death reports show otherwise..
If you know what the doctors are describing some of this is pretty graphic and torturous..
Now for everyone of those that are listed homicide (even the ones that arn't) do you think their families like america or not..
Just read your daily paper for your answer... news today lists 59 wounded / dead vs 2 dead suiciders.. with attrition like that how are we going to win this bloody war.. (today it was iraqis who got it..tomorrow who knows..)
when you have explosives costing $50 take out several million in logistic costs not to mention morale that is not a winning equation for total victory as the administration is currently peddling
Im curious your response on both issues.. the torture and whos accountable and the current status of the iraq war.
Saddam trial is just a distraction..
DoctorYo
-
From my point of view it is an obvious wrongdoing, but your following statement kills your own argument …
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Gunthr
Kids who's parents don't teach them right from wrong are subject to this condition later on in life when they are adults. They become easily confused.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I disagree. My point is that truth exists, and kids should be enlightened to that fact.
-
Dr. Yo;
I guess I see it different than you. I would never argue for the morality of war (although I would argue that it is sometimes necessary)
I won't address your statistics; I don't know where you got them from, but I will say that, if true, I am not surprized. Still, we can't condone murder or needless torture.
The interesting question, the underlying question, is your politics and mine. We both observe the same phenomena, and draw conclusions that are 180 degrees from the other, at least on the issue of torture, and probably, what constitutes torture, as well as whether or not we should be over there in the first place. So... this is America. We can disagree.
-
Truth does exist, but truth isn't "good" or "wrong". Truth just is. How we interpret the truth is entirely subjective. Given the choice to save one out of two people from certain death the perceived morality of your choice will differ greatly depending on if you ask the guy who gets to live or the guy who gets to die. - VOTP
I disagree. The truth is always "good." To me, truth and love is what God is.
I question your example of the two individuals, one of whom may die. In your world of relativism, you assume that there is no right, no wrong, and no truth. Yet one individual may choose to die so that the other may live. This is not explained in your construct.
-
Or how to devoid a thread of any arguability.
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
Sadam comitted among others crimes of genocide and he is answering for them in a joke of a trial.
Rumsfeld and Bush sr should be seated next to Saddam as co-defendants...After all they supplied him with the WMD and didn't give a rat's prettythang when he used it on Iranians/Kurds.
It was only when they needed an excuse to go to war did Bush say"He used WMD on his own people!!"..btw..Kurds are not "his own people"
-
Now Rummy and Bush gave Saddam WMD? :D
-
Originally posted by VOR
Now Rummy and Bush gave Saddam WMD? :D
What's funny about it?
http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=164752&pagenumber=2
-
Shakes head in dismay.
Gentlemen, we are returned to the days before King Arthur.
Might does not neccessarily make Right. It never has, and it never will.
Might may win in the short run, but in the end it can not stand alone.
It is what you do with that might, that power that determines right or wrong.
Saddam Abused his, is there any question about it?
He tortured, killed, maimed, probably mostly out of paranoia.
Well with those 2 inbreed monsters he sired I'd of been worried too.
As to what to do with Saddam, ,well I'll take a page from my latest Dirk Pitt novel by Clive Cussler.
Pitt upon captureing a monster of a man who forced them into slavery to work a good mine. Tied the man up in a underground chamber which was used to hold all the dead bodies of his victims. After ensuring that he had just enough water available to ensure a long lingering death. He blew the chamber entrance closed, sealing him away from the world for all time. Giving this character lots of time to think upon his mistakes as he slowly died from lack of water & food. All the while surrounded by the ghost's of those he killed.
Pick an underground bunker, round up the bodies off all those who have been killed in Saddams name. All those victims of him and his sons. Dig up the bodies of the Republican Guard who died for him. Find all the bodys Install a couple of video camera's out of his reach. Put Saddam in it, and close it up for all time.
Pour the door full of Concrete, rock, whatever the means to make sure he can never escape.
You want reality TV, lets have the ability to watch Saddam slowly die.
-
Nice double-standard there Ghost.
Just get the court case over with, and move on to catching the rest of the Saddams.
Fund the Saddam torture cam yourself.. any post-King Arthur tribunal would deny your "right" to do it.
-
Originally posted by SirLoin
What's funny about it?
I'd tell ya, but I don't think you'd appreciate my sense of humor. I'll just watch the thread go by.
:D
-
Skuzzy which veteran account does "VoiceOfThePast"'s IP match up with?
-
And tell me where his daughter goes to school, too, please.
-
SunKing, that would be GScholz. Good catch.
-
Gsholtz! Hi there, I knew it was too intelligent a post to be Mr Blacks!
You do realise, VOTP that you are stating the bleeding obvious.
I like Gunthr's definition of moral relativism. He seems to hold the absolute values which we all must follow!
Gosth: I think Edgar Allen Poe got there first with 'The Pit and the Pendulum' and Clive Cussler ripped him off a little bit.
Ravs