A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital SLR Cameras
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

The Value Of An Apology, At Least From A Republican's Perspective!!



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old October 1st 09, 07:34 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Chris H
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,283
Default The Value Of An Apology, At Least From A Republican's Perspective!!

In message , Bill Graham
writes

"DRS" wrote in message news:gaSdndFLGuUoe1
...
"Neil Harrington" wrote in message


[...]

The Geneva Convention does not, as far as I know, offer any protection
whatever to combatants who are not part of any recognized military
force. If you think it does, show me where.

Combatants captured not in proper uniform are not POWs and have no
rights at all -- they can be and have been just executed on the spot.
That's been the rule for at least a few hundred years.


Every person has rights. Many of the detainees at Guananemo have
been shown to have not been involved in terrorist activities and were
captured by mistake. That is why civilised countries insist on the
rule of law, where no person may be detained without due process,
something the Bush administration fought every step of the way. It
is not acceptable to merely deem someone a terrorist or a criminal by
fiat. It must be established by evidence.


In wartime, anyone who is a citizen of the other side that is caught
out of uniform in your territory is a spy, and can be shot
unceremoniously.


No... Where did you get that stupid idea?
Most countries have the death penalty for treason .
A spy is tried as a CIVILIAN and when found guilty by due process is
sentenced.

It used to be shooting or hanging. These days in Europe and other
civilised parts of the world we don't have the death penalty. We leave
that to the axis of evil such as Iran, N.Korea, Israel, China and the
USA (the USA executing more than any of the others)

So, the argument comes down to things like: Are we really in "wartime"?

Not in Iraq or Afghanistan. Technically it is a Police action

Who is a citizen of, "The other side"? - Is there an, "other side"?

No. There is no "other side" There is no enemy country or Army

What is the other sides, "Uniform"?

There is no "other side" it is civilian criminals.

IOW, things are a lot more complicated that they at first seem.


No they are quite simple.

And there certainly is lots of room for argument over what is
acceptable and what is not.


No there is no room at all...

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/



  #12  
Old October 1st 09, 07:34 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Bill Graham
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,294
Default The Value Of An Apology, At Least From A Republican's Perspective!!


"DRS" wrote in message
. au...
There is genuine dispute among international jurists about the legitimacy
of the Taliban government given the state of armed resistance to it. The
invasion of Iraq was unquestionably illegal but the invasion of
Afghanistan is legally ambiguous.


The invasion of Iraq was not, "unquestionably illegal". I question the
illegality of it. Saddam Hussein killed over two million Iraqi's during his
30 year reign as Iraq's president. To me, this justifies eliminating him.
Certainly, it at least raises the "question" of legality/illegality. Maybe
he only killed one million. Maybe he killed four million. At what point
would you consider it mandatory that the other heads of state in this world
become justified in killing him? Were we justified in killing Adolf Hitler?
Should we have killed Josef Stalin? Should we just turn out backs on
anything, and not ever kill anybody, no matter what they do? And, in any
case, how can you dismiss the whole argument with a half dozen words?

  #13  
Old October 1st 09, 07:37 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Walter Banks
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 803
Default The Value Of An Apology, At Least From A Republican's Perspective!!



Bill Graham wrote:

Saddam Hussein killed over two million Iraqi's during his
30 year reign as Iraq's president. To me, this justifies eliminating him.
Certainly, it at least raises the "question" of legality/illegality. Maybe
he only killed one million. Maybe he killed four million. At what point
would you consider it mandatory that the other heads of state in this world
become justified in killing him? Were we justified in killing Adolf Hitler?
Should we have killed Josef Stalin?


This is a slippery slope, what separates a leader who killed a million
from one who killed 900,000. Is 100,000 enough? What about
3,000?

Using this measure to justify invading and deposing a leader can
have un-intended consequenses.

w..


  #14  
Old October 1st 09, 07:37 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
DRS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 430
Default The Value Of An Apology, At Least From A Republican's Perspective!!

"Bill Graham" wrote in message

"DRS" wrote in message
. au...
There is genuine dispute among international jurists about the
legitimacy of the Taliban government given the state of armed
resistance to it. The invasion of Iraq was unquestionably illegal
but the invasion of Afghanistan is legally ambiguous.


The invasion of Iraq was not, "unquestionably illegal". I question the
illegality of it.


Yes, but you make definitions up as you go along. That doesn't count.



  #15  
Old October 1st 09, 07:43 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Bill Graham
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,294
Default The Value Of An Apology, At Least From A Republican's Perspective!!


"Walter Banks" wrote in message
...


Bill Graham wrote:

In wartime, anyone who is a citizen of the other side that is caught out
of
uniform in your territory is a spy, and can be shot unceremoniously.


What about citizens of the other side in their own territory. Many in
GitMo were arrested in Afghanistan and Iraq

So, the
argument comes down to things like: Are we really in "wartime"? Who is a
citizen of, "The other side"? - Is there an, "other side"? What is the
other
sides, "Uniform"? IOW, things are a lot more complicated that they at
first
seem. And there certainly is lots of room for argument over what is
acceptable and what is not.


Some good points Bill..

Few seem to be arguing the arrest, most are arguing due process what
ever that may be. Treatment of detained persons is a real issue with
many different consequences. One of the few politicians in the US that
has thought this through is McCain.

w..


Yes. the problem is we are accustomed to more conventional wars where armies
had a home country, and wore uniforms, and assembled together and took up
arms against other similar armies. In a terrorist action, or series of
terrorist actions such as we are now experiencing, few of the conventional
rules apply. In some ways, it is similar to our civil war.....No uniforms,
isolated bands of people shooting at other ununiformed isolated bands of
people......And, in the same way, it is hard to establish rules of conduct
that are cut and dried.

  #16  
Old October 1st 09, 07:47 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Walter Banks
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 803
Default The Value Of An Apology, At Least From A Republican's Perspective!!



Bill Graham wrote:

Yes. the problem is we are accustomed to more conventional wars where armies
had a home country, and wore uniforms, and assembled together and took up
arms against other similar armies. In a terrorist action, or series of
terrorist actions such as we are now experiencing, few of the conventional
rules apply. In some ways, it is similar to our civil war.....No uniforms,
isolated bands of people shooting at other ununiformed isolated bands of
people......And, in the same way, it is hard to establish rules of conduct
that are cut and dried.


Actually it goes right back to 19 April 1775 Americans won that one but
200 years later have not learned the lessons it taught. History before that brought
the assassins, ninja and many other unconventional warriors.

w..



  #17  
Old October 1st 09, 08:07 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Bill Graham
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,294
Default The Value Of An Apology, At Least From A Republican's Perspective!!


"Walter Banks" wrote in message
...


Bill Graham wrote:

Saddam Hussein killed over two million Iraqi's during his
30 year reign as Iraq's president. To me, this justifies eliminating him.
Certainly, it at least raises the "question" of legality/illegality.
Maybe
he only killed one million. Maybe he killed four million. At what point
would you consider it mandatory that the other heads of state in this
world
become justified in killing him? Were we justified in killing Adolf
Hitler?
Should we have killed Josef Stalin?


This is a slippery slope, what separates a leader who killed a million
from one who killed 900,000. Is 100,000 enough? What about
3,000?

Using this measure to justify invading and deposing a leader can
have un-intended consequenses.

w..


This is true, but what other measure is there? Were we justified in
supporting England in her war against Hitler? And, if not, then at what
point should we have done so in order to protect ourselves? - Or, is no war
ever justified? Right now, We call it justification to do whatever we have
to do to prevent certain other countries from developing their own nuclear
weapon capability. Is this justified? Should we wait for the terrorists to
detonate a nuclear bomb in downtown Washington DC? Should we keep our
congressmen in hiding in their own states, and force them to debate bills
via satellite hook up? What constitutes, "justification", when it comes down
to attacking another country?

  #18  
Old October 1st 09, 08:12 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Walter Banks
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 803
Default The Value Of An Apology, At Least From A Republican's Perspective!!



Bill Graham wrote:

"Walter Banks" wrote in message

This is a slippery slope, what separates a leader who killed a million
from one who killed 900,000. Is 100,000 enough? What about
3,000?

Using this measure to justify invading and deposing a leader can
have un-intended consequenses.


This is true, but what other measure is there? Were we justified in
supporting England in her war against Hitler? And, if not, then at what
point should we have done so in order to protect ourselves?


Looking at the very narrow case of attacking a country to dispose
a leader and apply the same rules to attacks on the US. I am not
justifying either one just thinking through the logic of your statement.

w..


  #19  
Old October 1st 09, 08:12 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Bill Graham
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,294
Default The Value Of An Apology, At Least From A Republican's Perspective!!


"DRS" wrote in message
. au...
"Bill Graham" wrote in message

"DRS" wrote in message
. au...
There is genuine dispute among international jurists about the
legitimacy of the Taliban government given the state of armed
resistance to it. The invasion of Iraq was unquestionably illegal
but the invasion of Afghanistan is legally ambiguous.


The invasion of Iraq was not, "unquestionably illegal". I question the
illegality of it.


Yes, but you make definitions up as you go along. That doesn't count.


"Doesn't count"? What are the rules of this "game we are playing"? My
definitions come from "Webster's Dictionary of the English Language." It all
comes down to exactly that.....Definitions. Like, "The right of the people
to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed", If my interpretation differs
from that of the Supreme Court, then I am going to have to break the "law of
the land". Sorry about that.....

  #20  
Old October 1st 09, 08:27 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Bill Graham
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,294
Default The Value Of An Apology, At Least From A Republican's Perspective!!


"Walter Banks" wrote in message
...


Bill Graham wrote:

Yes. the problem is we are accustomed to more conventional wars where
armies
had a home country, and wore uniforms, and assembled together and took up
arms against other similar armies. In a terrorist action, or series of
terrorist actions such as we are now experiencing, few of the
conventional
rules apply. In some ways, it is similar to our civil war.....No
uniforms,
isolated bands of people shooting at other ununiformed isolated bands of
people......And, in the same way, it is hard to establish rules of
conduct
that are cut and dried.


Actually it goes right back to 19 April 1775 Americans won that one but
200 years later have not learned the lessons it taught. History before
that brought
the assassins, ninja and many other unconventional warriors.

w.

..
So we need new rules of acceptable conduct. And my question is, are the UN
rules, and the Geneva Convention rules, applicable to fighting off these
kinds of terrorist actions? And, if not, then what are we to do before new
rules are established, and who will establish them? Personally, I don't see
any way out right now, but for us to establish our own rules as we go. And
this means attacking other rogue countries such as Iran and North Korea as
necessary to keep them from acquiring nuclear weapons and selling/giving
them to terrorists. If there is some other way to prevent this, I am all
ears.....

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Value Of An Apology, At Least From A Republican's Perspective!! Chris H 35mm Photo Equipment 0 October 1st 09 08:24 AM
The Value Of An Apology, At Least From A Republican's Perspective!! Bill Graham 35mm Photo Equipment 0 September 17th 09 11:21 PM
The Value Of An Apology, At Least From A Republican's Perspective!! Bill Graham 35mm Photo Equipment 0 September 17th 09 11:14 PM
The Value Of An Apology, At Least From A Republican's Perspective!! Bill Graham 35mm Photo Equipment 0 September 17th 09 11:04 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:11 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.