Volkswagen Passat Forum banner

1 - 20 of 74 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
14,054 Posts
I've given up on this whole thing. Evidently we need a new Geneva Convention since people seem to think we have to give combatant rights to illegal combatants. Once again words don't mean anything.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23,182 Posts
honestly, who besides us even follows the GC anymore??? and why the f*ck are we following it while fighting terrorists??? good thing I'm not in charge...I'd have nuked that place a LONG time ago. seriously.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,116 Posts
I've given up on this whole thing. Evidently we need a new Geneva Convention since people seem to think we have to give combatant rights to illegal combatants. Once again words don't mean anything.
What they (including the Supreme Court) think (correctly) is that that Geneva Convention includes a minimum protection for everyone captured in a combat zone, whether they are part of a regular army or a school bus driver. Heaven forbid the actual wording of the document get in the way of what you imagine it should say..
 
2

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
You guys are fools we need these kinds of laws, there has to be laws...So the next president can break em!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23,182 Posts
What they (including the Supreme Court) think (correctly) is that that Geneva Convention includes a minimum protection for everyone captured in a combat zone, whether they are part of a regular army or a school bus driver. Heaven forbid the actual wording of the document get in the way of what you imagine it should say..
This discussion has nothing to so with prisoners, but since you want to go down that path. The Geneva Conventions only cover LAWFUL combatants, who are recognized members of a countries military. If some housewife picks up an AK-47 and starts shooting she gets zero protection. Those are the rules in the Geneva Conventions. We didn't MAKE them, we just FOLLOW them. It's the same with a pilot. In his plane he's fair game, if he parachutes out he's protected...unless he pulls out his sidearm and starts firing. Now he'a a target again. Also, the Geneva Conventions covers POWs. If you weren't a Lawful Combatant guess what you can't be?
 

·
My intake has Emphysema
Joined
·
7,708 Posts
honestly, who besides us even follows the GC anymore??? and why the f*ck are we following it while fighting terrorists??? good thing I'm not in charge...I'd have nuked that place a LONG time ago. seriously.
x2. Would make a real pretty mirror......or stained glass(sorry, that WAS kinda sick).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,541 Posts
This discussion has nothing to so with prisoners, but since you want to go down that path. The Geneva Conventions only cover LAWFUL combatants, who are recognized members of a countries military. If some housewife picks up an AK-47 and starts shooting she gets zero protection. Those are the rules in the Geneva Conventions. We didn't MAKE them, we just FOLLOW them. It's the same with a pilot. In his plane he's fair game, if he parachutes out he's protected...unless he pulls out his sidearm and starts firing. Now he'a a target again. Also, the Geneva Conventions covers POWs. If you weren't a Lawful Combatant guess what you can't be?
This is where it falls apart for me.

If a person is not deemed an enemy combatant they should be deemed criminals. You know... normal criminals. If a non-citizen committs a crime (murder, attempted murder etc..) on our soil then we try that non-citizen for the crime they way that we would if a non-citizen stole a candy bar.
If a non-citizen committs a crime on foreign soil (murder etc.) then that non-citizen should be tried by the government in power in that nation.

Saying that a terorist is an illegal comabant is misleading. A terrorist a not a legal combatant. A terrorist is NOT an illegal combatant. There is a subtle difference here.

The Geneva conventions protect the members of the millitary in a time of war. International treaty and international law protect the rights of criminals.

We have manufactured the notion of terrorist in the modern context and it is amorphic and without definition. If you don't agree with me here I challenge you to a simple exercise. One that we should all be imploring the Bush Administration to answer. This answer puts to bed this disussion one way or another:

What is the definition of a Terrorist?

This question is what makes me REALLY concerned about the state of our foreign and domestic policy and the War on Terror.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,541 Posts
honestly, who besides us even follows the GC anymore??? and why the f*ck are we following it while fighting terrorists??? good thing I'm not in charge...I'd have nuked that place a LONG time ago. seriously.
You are right. It's a good thing you aren't in charge. America should never be lead by genocidal maniacs with no regard or care for human life. If you are honest and serious here... I'll say it. You should be ashamed of yourself.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,541 Posts
x2. Would make a real pretty mirror......or stained glass(sorry, that WAS kinda sick).
You trully are a terrible human being. You actually AGREE with the idea that we should committ MASSIVE genocide in the middle east... and indiscriminantly MURDER thousands of innocent people for the sake of WHAT!? Seriosuly. You admit to this in a public forum? Sicko. Really. You are sick. You wonder why so many people don't like Christians. Funny how it's usually the religious people who advocate genocide huh? Scumbag.
 

·
My intake has Emphysema
Joined
·
7,708 Posts
Spirare, have you hugged your tree today?

What Paul and I are saying is that we have friends over there getting killed because they have to abide by rules of combat under the GC that shouldn't even apply. The terrorists have killed more men women and children in their own society then we've lost since this thing started. So, who's commiting genocide here? That makes them no better than the dog shit I stepped in yesterday.
These guys are of no affiliation under the GC and should therefore be treated as such.
I don't even know why I'm attempting to explain this. I'll tell you what, let's send you over there, put you in a convoy bringing food and medical supplies to the children that some assmunch just tried to blow up and let you get taken out by a IED. I promise, I won't shed a tear for you. Hell, I'll even pat the guy on the back and offer him citizenship.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,541 Posts
Spirare, have you hugged your tree today?
What does this even mean? because I don't stand by and give yo a pass on this you imply that I'm an environmentalist? What kind of moron are you? Oh yeah... a christian. That's right. Or is this your "son" typing in your name again? Asshole.

What Paul and I are saying is that we have friends over there getting killed because they have to abide by rules of combat under the GC that shouldn't even apply.
This is a non-sequitor. Look it up moron. Adherence or NOT to the Geneva Convention has no bearing on why your firends are getting killed. This has nothing to do with the discussion at hand.

The terrorists have killed more men women and children in their own society then we've lost since this thing started. So, who's commiting genocide here? That makes them no better than the dog shit I stepped in yesterday.
Good point.. since the TERRORISTS have done this we should just do the job FOR them! Then what are we? Oh yeah.. genocidal.

These guys are of no affiliation under the GC and should therefore be treated as such.
Again this is meaningless... You are a moron. This doesn't make sense in it's own context much less the context of the damned discussion. Idiot.
I don't even know why I'm attempting to explain this. I'll tell you what, let's send you over there, put you in a convoy bringing food and medical supplies to the children that some assmunch just tried to blow up and let you get taken out by a IED. I promise, I won't shed a tear for you. Hell, I'll even pat the guy on the back and offer him citizenship.
Go to hell... Oh yeah. You WILL if you believe your faith is true.

You really are an atrocious human being. If the worst that you can say about me is to ask if I "Have hugged a tree today"... but the worst I can say to you is that you are advocating the mass MURDER of hundreds of thousands of people to gain retriburtion for the war time killing of our illegal invasion force... Yeah man. You really really do suck as a human being. You justify yourself on the premise that the TERRORISTS DO IT!? Really... Then you say that you wold applaud MY death for my defesne of those same inncoents that you decry the 'terrorists' for killing? You claim to be a Christian? I know more moral satanists. Dirt bag. Really. You are scum.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,541 Posts
Spirare, have you hugged your tree today?

What Paul and I are saying is that we have friends over there getting killed because they have to abide by rules of combat under the GC that shouldn't even apply. The terrorists have killed more men women and children in their own society then we've lost since this thing started. So, who's commiting genocide here? That makes them no better than the dog shit I stepped in yesterday.
These guys are of no affiliation under the GC and should therefore be treated as such.
I don't even know why I'm attempting to explain this. I'll tell you what, let's send you over there, put you in a convoy bringing food and medical supplies to the children that some assmunch just tried to blow up and let you get taken out by a IED. I promise, I won't shed a tear for you. Hell, I'll even pat the guy on the back and offer him citizenship.
Try answering my question above.

Here I'll write it again:

What is the definition of a Terrorist?
 

·
My intake has Emphysema
Joined
·
7,708 Posts
First off, I'll be happy to inform you that no, this isn't my son.
But I'm so happy to see that you can bring yourself down to his level with the name calling. But then again, maybe it isn't really you?
But I do applaud you, for bringing a tear to my eye.......from laughing at you so hard.

So now, I'll make another comment; and I'm sure it will spark even more consecutive posts than before. Who ever said I was a Christian? It appears that you're making your arguement based on what you see Christians as and how they act. Hell, you're calling me one just because of my comments.
Hmmmm. I think you've already answered your own question as to what a terrorist is boss, or just reread your own posts and you'll see it. You're judging me the same way the terrorists we're fighting against judge the rest of society. I would almost even say that you didn't have a problem with 9/11. Simply because you obviously despise anyone who doesn't believe in what you do. I'm beginning to see the similarity.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23,182 Posts
You are right. It's a good thing you aren't in charge. America should never be lead by genocidal maniacs with no regard or care for human life. If you are honest and serious here... I'll say it. You should be ashamed of yourself.

I'd be nice and give ample warning so the innocents could get out in time. Don't go getting all high and mighty on me, I'm not going to kill innocent people just to get the small minority that are causing problems.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23,182 Posts
You trully are a terrible human being. You actually AGREE with the idea that we should committ MASSIVE genocide in the middle east... and indiscriminantly MURDER thousands of innocent people for the sake of WHAT!? Seriosuly. You admit to this in a public forum? Sicko. Really. You are sick. You wonder why so many people don't like Christians. Funny how it's usually the religious people who advocate genocide huh? Scumbag.
I'm FAR from religious. You are right about the religious nut cases being the violent ones. They preach tolerance but don't show any.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23,182 Posts
This is where it falls apart for me.

If a person is not deemed an enemy combatant they should be deemed criminals. You know... normal criminals.
They are.

If a non-citizen committs a crime (murder, attempted murder etc..) on our soil then we try that non-citizen for the crime they way that we would if a non-citizen stole a candy bar.
If a non-citizen committs a crime on foreign soil (murder etc.) then that non-citizen should be tried by the government in power in that nation.
And this exactly what to do with the discussion at hand? We're not talking about non-citizens.

Saying that a terorist is an illegal comabant is misleading. A terrorist a not a legal combatant. A terrorist is NOT an illegal combatant. There is a subtle difference here.
No it's not. A terrorist is NOT a legal combatant and they are not a non-combatant so that leave one category, illegal combatant. Illegal combatant are defined by 2 things, their tactics and their affiliation with their country's military, or lack thereof.

The Geneva conventions protect the members of the millitary in a time of war. International treaty and international law protect the rights of criminals.
You're forgetting that's in a declared war between 2 countries. Last time I checked al Quaida isn't a country.

We have manufactured the notion of terrorist in the modern context and it is amorphic and without definition. If you don't agree with me here I challenge you to a simple exercise. One that we should all be imploring the Bush Administration to answer. This answer puts to bed this disussion one way or another:

What is the definition of a Terrorist?

This question is what makes me REALLY concerned about the state of our foreign and domestic policy and the War on Terror.
Simple, anyone that uses acts of violence to terrorize the public. That's a GROSS generalization of the definition but I don't want to type it all out and this pretty much covers it.
 

·
1st Gear
Joined
·
17,568 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
Spirare, have you hugged your tree today?

What Paul and I are saying is that we have friends over there getting killed because they have to abide by rules of combat under the GC that shouldn't even apply. The terrorists have killed more men women and children in their own society then we've lost since this thing started. So, who's commiting genocide here? That makes them no better than the dog shit I stepped in yesterday.
These guys are of no affiliation under the GC and should therefore be treated as such.
I don't even know why I'm attempting to explain this. I'll tell you what, let's send you over there, put you in a convoy bringing food and medical supplies to the children that some assmunch just tried to blow up and let you get taken out by a IED. I promise, I won't shed a tear for you. Hell, I'll even pat the guy on the back and offer him citizenship.
Slow your horses buddy......Iraq has VERY little to do with Terrorists....and EVERYTHING to do with Religious groups going at eachother. Now when I say very little to do with terrorists, I mean terrorists that we are after...member? Those that attact us 9/11??? Those are the ones.

Think of it as US putting themselfs in the positition Israel has been in for MANY years.....just not against 1 religious group but 3. ;)

If you add up "terrorist" attacks VS religious group attacks......well there you have it.

Now if you want to call these religious groups "terrorists" (heck acts they carry out ARE terrorism) go ahead.....just next time you speak of Israel and Palestine I want you to call both terrorist too.

Also US falls into the category as well, don't forget that our soliders carried out Terrorism acts against Iraqi civilans also.

:)

Now don't get me wrong, it's a known fact that AlQuada is sending their units there to fight etc but the fact is # of religious groups creating these terrorists acts is FAR greater then attacks from people we are after. Do you think these religious groups would do these things if US never invaded the country? :)

Saddam had a pretty good grip on these folks, something we can't do as NOW is the time for them to fight for land/etc.

I bet if you ask your average American if we are fighting "terrorism" or "religious groups" in Iraq.....most would say "Terrorist" and they would be right, what people FAIL to understand that these terrorists are NOT the ones that we are looking for....once that want to "take out the west" etc (although I'm sure some of them would like that).

If we want to go after THOSE.....Iran would be a good start, but I don't see ANYTHING being done on that end.

Now getting back on topic, think WW2.......let's say Poland/France or any other German occiupied territory......think of the rebel fighters trying to fight back for freedom of their country.......now sit down and REALLY think about this law. I really hope you get the point.

I'd be nice and give ample warning so the innocents could get out in time. Don't go getting all high and mighty on me, I'm not going to kill innocent people just to get the small minority that are causing problems.
Warning? To whom? These people have no cars no means of moving....no money.......nowhere to go.....no BASIC supplys.....or food?

You sound like Mr.Bush. "IRAQ we are coming, get ready" 2 weeks before the invasion.SMART, VERY smart.

Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
 
1 - 20 of 74 Posts
Top