Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Vulcan on April 01, 2007, 08:40:16 PM
-
Ohh yeah, amnesty international.
http://www.amnesty.org/actnow/
Notice anything missing?
-
Britons need not apply.
-
I think that organization is intended to help victims of state oppression, not the oppressors themselves.
-
Originally posted by namvet
I think that organization is intended to help victims of state oppression, not the oppressors themselves.
What is the record for stupid statements?
-
n00k them.
I hate the Guantanamo bay crying.
Could you imagine trying German POWs individually in civilian US courts during WWII?
Morons.
-
Originally posted by Joachim
Could you imagine trying German POWs individually in civilian US courts during WWII?
Let's not forget that the allied armies also had war criminals, who by the same stantards should been prosecuted with many of the convicted germans. No allied soldier was prosecuted for war crimes.
It's a bad comparison to compare Gitmo to WWII. Although it's still true that the allies are hardly at all prosecuted for war crimes today - Only some inviduals have been sentenced, but none of their commanders and in most cases every other participant in a crime has walked free.
-
Nothing like having a differant set of rules for yourselves than you have for everyone else.
If it were Americans being illegaly imprisoned and tortured in foreign prison camps you would all no doubt be up on your high horse calling for a nuclear strike.
If you arent going to play by the rules, what do you think gives you the right to enforce them, especially outside of the US of A?
I'm talking about David Hicks here, a citizen of a long term, current and active military ally , who was not captured as an armed enemy combatant but who surrendered when the Govt he was employed by became the enemy of his own nation and of the US.
It is a very differant story for POWs, armed enemy combatants captured in combat, but Hicks isnt one of those.
-
Doesn't appear that David Hicks is exactly innocent. It appears that he was captured by the Northern Alliance forces in Afghanistan and turned over to the US authorities. He is a Muslim that attended an Al-Qaeada training camp.
He has fought in Kosovo, Pakistan and Afghanistan.
Linkage
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Hicks
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/3044386.stm
-
David Hick's detention, eventual charge(s), and "trial" were a joke...so much so it isn't his supposed guilt (not that was was ever in question by the govt) thats at issue, but the way he was readily abandoned to his fate by our govt. and any form of a unbiased, fair trial was made unavailable to him. A tenent which democracy is supposedly based on - even to our most corrupt..
Hicks was captured deserting the battlefield by bus, by the northern alliance after spending the "war" guarding a tank which never fired a shot...and at most he was a Taleban foot soldier (who also never fired a single shot) - which is a good reason to spend 4-5 years in solitary confinement without formal charge but if you were to believe the American and Australian govts. David Hicks was the worse of the worse......so bad he got a plea bargain and will serve 9 months in an austalian gaol while "gagged" from the media for a year (conviently long enough for the next fedeal elections)...but I supposed better than trying to fight a ad-hoc sham military "trial" (thank god for Major Michael Mori)
if he was in the Taleban foriegn ministry he could have gotten out years ago and gone to Yale, but guarding a tank is aparently far more dangerous to civilisation as we know it...
Tronsky
-
perhaps mr hicks should have been summarily executed along with all those others living in relative comfort at the expense of the American taxpayers in guantanamo. those guys are being coddled in a serene tropical setting and receiving far better treatment than our service personnnel would were the circumstances reversed.
I'm glad they were not executed but I don't think they should ever be released. I also think they should be relocated to a similar camp in a far less idyllic setting, death valley come immediately to mind.
-
if he was in the Taleban foriegn ministry he could have gotten out years ago and gone to Yale, but guarding a tank is aparently far more dangerous to civilisation as we know it...
Tronsky
His name isn't David Hicks. He changed it to Abu Muslim al-Austraili, aka Muhammed Dawood. He got more than a fair shake from the USA, considering he should have gotten a bullet in the head right where he was captured. You might want to keep an eye on him when he gets home ....
-
Ah, so the American response to surrendering enemies should now be “a bullet in the head”? Must be windy up on that moral high ground there.
-
Originally posted by Rino
What is the record for stupid statements?
Posts: 66
-
it has nothing whatsoever to do with "moral high ground".
Muhammed Dawood was trained to kill Americans. He was trained in the use of RPGs. He was trained to kidnap. To use explosives, to use cammoflage and all the other ways to kill. He was issued weapons and ammunition, which he accepted, to kill Americans. He was on a battlefield. He was an Al Qaeda fighter. i don't know the circumstances of his capture, but when he was fighting us, he should have gotten a bullet in the head, and I wish he had - to make the world a safer place.
-
Originally posted by Viking
Ah, so the American response to surrendering enemies should now be “a bullet in the head”? Must be windy up on that moral high ground there.
Compassionate Conservatism!
-
Originally posted by Gunthr
it has nothing whatsoever to do with "moral high ground".
Muhammed Dawood was trained to kill Americans. He was trained in the use of RPGs. He was trained to kidnap. To use explosives, to use cammoflage and all the other ways to kill. He was issued weapons and ammunition, which he accepted, to kill Americans. He was on a battlefield. He was an Al Qaeda fighter. i don't know the circumstances of his capture, but when he was fighting us, he should have gotten a bullet in the head, and I wish he had - to make the world a safer place.
So he was trained to be a soldier. And in your own words "he was on the battlefield". Seems to me he was an enemy worthy of respect.
-
So he was trained to be a soldier. And in your own words "he was on the battlefield". Seems to me he was an enemy worthy of respect. - Viking
not as far as I'm concerned. and don't play wordgames. He is a terrorist who trained with Al Qaeda after 911 occurred which should tell you EXACTLY what kind of person he is.
Yes, I feel strongly about it. I sincerely don't want to offend any Aussies. I admire Austrailians. However, Muhammed Dawood, as stated by someone above, has forsaken his birth nation to become a terrorist. He may have changed his mind when he discovered there were consequences, but i have no respect for those who support the deliberate targetting and killing of innocents.
-
Originally posted by Bluedog
Nothing like having a differant set of rules for yourselves than you have for everyone else.
Under Bushs new definition, most of the atrocities committed by Saddam Hussein are no longer "torture".. it was "torture" before we went to war tho...
-
i thought this thread was about the british sailors and lack of interest by amnesty international?
nice way to spin it into another hate america rant.
-
I don't think our friends hate us. they come off as envious and petty, wishing they could be us sadly knowing they can never be.
-
Solution to our legal woes is simply to kill them on the battlefield and spare ourselves the effort of having to transport, house, and feed them for an indefinite period of time while the ACLU pays their legal fees.
Terrorists should be given the same consideration they give to the civilians they target with their homicide attack victims; none, no quarter for these people.
-
Originally posted by Fishu
Let's not forget that the allied armies also had war criminals, who by the same stantards should been prosecuted with many of the convicted germans. No allied soldier was prosecuted for war crimes.
I don't see what war crimes has to do with POWs having access to civilian courts.
-
Originally posted by Gunthr
not as far as I'm concerned. and don't play wordgames. He is a terrorist who trained with Al Qaeda after 911 occurred which should tell you EXACTLY what kind of person he is.
Yes, I feel strongly about it. I sincerely don't want to offend any Aussies. I admire Austrailians. However, Muhammed Dawood, as stated by someone above, has forsaken his birth nation to become a terrorist. He may have changed his mind when he discovered there were consequences, but i have no respect for those who support the deliberate targetting and killing of innocents.
He forsook his birth nation to fight for something he believed was right. I can respect that. Unless he himself partook in the killing of innocents I cannot fault him, just as I cannot fault every US soldier for the crimes committed by some.
-
Originally posted by Joachim
I don't see what war crimes has to do with POWs having access to civilian courts.
Are they POW's or civilian criminals? POW's are protected by the GC. Civilians are protected by US law. Make up you your mind.
-
you can't just summarily execute them. the line is blurred as to whether they are trerrorists or combatants too. the bottom line is that no matter which path the U.S. takes it will draw heat and ridicule from the envious others.
-
Originally posted by Jackal1
Posts: 66
It's Weasel. He's baaaaaack...
-
Originally posted by storch
you can't just summarily execute them. the line is blurred as to whether they are trerrorists or combatants too. the bottom line is that no matter which path the U.S. takes it will draw heat and ridicule from the envious others.
May I respectfully remind you, you are supposed to be the good guys.
-
while not entirely perfect but we are the good guys. there is no people kinder or geniunely helpful. we have proven this time and again. we are the paradigm for what humanity should be. Americans, the people with heart.
-
You are also very modest.
-
Oh lord, it's hard to be humble when we're perfect in every way. when we wake up in the morning we're better looking each day. to know us is to love us, we must be one heck of a land, oh lord it's hard to be humble we're doing the best that we can. :D
-
lol :D
-
gee...i think everyone knows american holds itself to the highest of all double standards, take special fountain boy for example...
-
what? did the icebear kick you out of it's den too? sheesh you guys sure are envious.
-
Originally posted by storch
you can't just summarily execute them. the line is blurred as to whether they are trerrorists or combatants too. the bottom line is that no matter which path the U.S. takes it will draw heat and ridicule from the envious others.
All I'm saying is that when their cave or redoubt is surrounded by U.S troops and they come out with their hands up, their pants pissed from fear, just put a few rounds into them and call it a day. Say they were pointing rifles towards the GIs or whatever.
Mind you I'm speaking specifically of situations on the battlefield/ that involve violence, not people apprehended otherwise.
-
that would be murder. that is beneath us as a great and benevolent people. that would make us on the par with those euros and the arabs.
-
Originally posted by straffo
May I respectfully remind you, you are supposed to be the good guys.
i don't want to be the good guys, i want to be the winners.
-
Originally posted by Joachim
All I'm saying is that when their cave or redoubt is surrounded by U.S troops and they come out with their hands up, their pants pissed from fear, just put a few rounds into them and call it a day. Say they were pointing rifles towards the GIs or whatever.
Mind you I'm speaking specifically of situations on the battlefield/ that involve violence, not people apprehended otherwise.
You know soldier have to live after war ,they usually have all sort of troubles living with what as a soldier they had to do and see .
And you want them to commit murder ?
-
Originally posted by straffo
You know soldier have to live after war ,they usually have all sort of troubles living with what as a soldier they had to do and see .
And you want them to commit murder ?
your right, the poor terrorists having to live with the knowledge of killing all those innocent women and children. The UN should have therapy for them , paid for by the USA, of course.
-
well...i guess you would prefer cockroaches then...
you are right about your envious nature tho...but worshipping what bubbles beneath the muslim's feet is nothing to be envious about.
but...the in-law's 10k sq/ft house in golden beach is tho...;)
-
If a unit can take EPW's they should, if you summarily kill people because they have a different set of beliefs or customs (religious or cultural) you will only enrage the other peope of that belief and make them fight harder and longer.
We need to show that we are compasionate and caring and find a middle ground that we are willing to agree on, otherwise the fighting will never end.
If they are willing to fight to the death then so be it.
Thise that say that we should kill all reek of inexpierence and prejudice.
-
i'd have maybe respected Muhamed Dawood maybe a little if he had been killed in the fighting, but i'd still have contempt because he supported killing innocents - a cowardly despicable thing to do. He knew Al Qaeda are terrorists when he joined. he knew that they target civilians and kids when he joined. even so, i don't believe in summary execution either. he deserved to die, but not in cold blood. in that light, the time he spent at GITMO doesn't bother me a bit.
-
Originally posted by Joachim
I don't see what war crimes has to do with POWs having access to civilian courts.
POWs do have access to civilian courts. There was a famous case in the U.S. after WWII. The Nazi SS murders at Malmede (sp?) that were responsible for the cold blooded massacre of over 200 US POWs had their death sentences over turned in US court because it was successfuly argued that the US interrigators were Jewish soldiers (most of them were known as "Camp Richie (sp?) Boys") and therefore biased. Interesting to note that the US lawyer that defended these murderous Nazis was none other than Joe "I hate Red" McCarthy.
ack-ack
-
Originally posted by john9001
i thought this thread was about the british sailors and lack of interest by amnesty international?
nice way to spin it into another hate america rant.
Have you ever argued a point from opposite sides with a friend?
Did disagreement make you any less of a friend?
You know, it is possable to disagree with the handling of certain matters, without hate or envy or any of that other BS playing any part at all.
I dont hate America at all, in fact I admire the ideals it stands for, I have immediate family who live there, and have found the vast majority of Americans I have met to be genuinely nice, freindly people.
I'm not envious either, there is nothing the US can offer it's citizens that isnt available to me as an Australian citizen right here at home.
I disagree with a lot of stuff the Australian govt does too, does that mean I hate Australia? No, of course it doesnt.
Do you agree one hundred percent, without fail, every thing the US govt does, if not, are you just another hater , or an American who is proud of and loves his country but disagrees on some things ?.
There is a lot of BS Bush is Satan, America sux, blah blah blah out there on the net, and I can see how it would get real old, real quick, but not everyone who disagrees with you hates you.
Perhaps giving the reason for our disagreement some thought and discussion instead of immediately labeling everyone Ameri-haters would go a long way toward changing the prevailing attitude toward the US at the moment.
Who knows, hearing the American side of the story presented without the whole 'we are so damn good' attitude might even swing us toward your way of seeing things.
-
As a member of Amnesty International,if any of you are ever wrongfully imprisoned or tortured,I will write letters on your behalf,including those on here who are indeed "Morons"- You know who you are!:aok
-
Originally posted by Hazzer
As a member of Amnesty International,if any of you are ever wrongfully imprisoned or tortured,I will write letters on your behalf,including those on here who are indeed "Morons"- You know who you are!:aok
we thank you for your efforts, but with your letter and US$10 I can go to starbucks and get a cup of coffee.
storch, HTC shop steward of the moron's union local 5-1/3 (my hat size)
-
I cant think of a country whose politics I like well enough to care if they like what we do or not. I don't want to be like them in the least. As such... I don't really care for their approval and...
I get real worried when the rest of the decaying socialist countries gives us an "attaboy"
I do appreciate it when they shut up tho.
lazs
-
As I read some of these posts I sometimes wonder about the following:
1) Are the Armed Forces of the United States and Britain the only countries on earth that are required to rigorously adhere to the laws of land warfare (http://www.combatindex.com/law_of_land_warfare.html) as they were codified by international agreements following the Second World War, while everyone else in the world is allowed to play the "oppressed victim" or "holy warrior" trump card and kill however, whenever, and whomever they see fit?
2) What exactly would our European friends suggest that Coalition forces do with captured Taliban/Al-Qaeda members?
As it is, from what members of my congregation in Afghanistan tell me the vast majority of the armed Taliban they capture in Afghanistan are handed over to the Afghani government which in turn releases the majority of them. One individual reports that his unit has captured many of the same people operating against coalition forces two or more times. They call it the "Catch and Release" program.
Also, before you go spouting off about US attrocities, please keep in mind that several of the men of my congregation have lost friends precisely because they were acting to prevent the loss of "civilian" lives and who frequently put themselves in harms way out of compassion for their enemies. Let me give you just three examples.
First, in his last deployment to Afghanistan one of the SF officers in our congregation lost one of his best men (as well as a friend of the family) because during a raid on a Taliban village, one of the Taliban was using his wife and daughter as human shields and literally firing from behind them. Instead of taking the shot, this man closed the distance between them and was in the process of moving the women out of the way when he was shot twice.
Secondly on a long patrol during which they were "dark" and out of contact a SF medic friend of mine expended most of the contents of his medical kit to save the life of a Taliban who had been firing on his unit from an ambush site with an RPK. He did that knowing that had they taken their own wounded before resupply, he wouldn't have had enough equipment to save them.
Third, all of the guys in Afghanistan have reported that the Taliban now routinely "cache" their weapons, because they know that the Coalition forces will not fire on them if they are not visibly armed. Immediately before and after attacks, they do their best to simply fade into the civilian population.
Incidents like the above happen literally all the time in Afghanistan and Iraq. On the other hand, all of these Coalition personal know that if they are captured by the Taliban, or AQ, or a militia they will be hideously tortured and then if they are extremely fortunate, have their heads sawn off.
And yet in the eyes of the international media, they are the bad guys for the way they treat the enemy. Where is the sense in it?
- SEAGOON
-
agendas are all about making sure that "sense" is buried away so deep and so quickly that people don't have time to use it.
lazs