 | | Re: Outrageous Iraqi Geneva Convention Violation
|
|
(...) Dolt--tell me when we wouldn't bend/break or otherwise disregard conventions where it suited our winning the war that much quicker--I direct you to the post about the two terrorists interrogated to death. "Our" side of this war might regard (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Outrageous Iraqi Geneva Convention Violation
|
|
What can you do? He's a "John Neal." See: (URL) Hop-Frog (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Outrageous Iraqi Geneva Convention Violation
|
|
(...) Sooo, damning us if we do, and damning us if we don't. Sounds about right. BTW, what's all of this "we" language? JOHN (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Outrageous Iraqi Geneva Convention Violation
|
|
(...) *YOU* are the one that *CONDEMNED* Iraq for breaking Geneva conventions. You want it every way as long as it's *your* way. You are adding *no* value except to perpetuate your own fallicious reasonings, ad nauseum. Go ahead, condemn the (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Outrageous Iraqi Geneva Convention Violation
|
|
(...) You could equally say damning them if they do, damning them if they don't. As others have said neither side is squeaky clean in this "War on Terrorism". ROSCO (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Outrageous Iraqi Geneva Convention Violation
|
|
(...) If you mean that I damn them if they breach Geneva Conventions, and I damn them if they abide by Geneva Conventions, but fight to preserve an evil regime, then yes you could say that. As far as being squeaky clean, I don't agree that one must (...) (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Outrageous Iraqi Geneva Convention Violation
|
|
(...) Try saying these things to yourself out loud first -- before writing them here. Murder is murder. -- Hop-Frog (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Outrageous Iraqi Geneva Convention Violation
|
|
(...) Do you follow your own advice, say with that gem below? (...) Well, hard to argue with that. Perhaps you'd care to expound? JOHN (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Outrageous Iraqi Geneva Convention Violation
|
|
(...) And I reject that you can sit there on your high horse and say "Those b*stards!!" when you're doing the same thing. I'm not saying that the US is *morally* equivalent to SH and his regime--I'm quite thankful that, even though it was under (...) (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Outrageous Iraqi Geneva Convention Violation
|
|
(...) By "same thing", do you mean that *we* are waving white flags at the Iraqi army and then ambushing them, or do you mean that we are displaying closeup images of dead Iraqis shot execution style through their forehead?" (...) Please cite (...) (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Outrageous Iraqi Geneva Convention Violation
|
|
(...) You just aren't listening, or being deliberately obtuse. *You* started this thread with: (URL) which you expressed outrage because Iraqis violated Geneva Conventions I, as well as others went on to point out to you, John, that the US, as well (...) (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Outrageous Iraqi Geneva Convention Violation
|
|
(...) Whoa, that's quite an indictment! Cease existing! Dave! (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | A pox on your house ( was Re: Outrageous Iraqi Geneva Convention Violation
|
|
(...) The conversation? Well one could wish far worse fates on the readership than for that particular conversation to cease existing, Dave! You know, you sure do use a lot of "!" in your writing, Dave! And what's more, it seems to incite others to (...) (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Outrageous Iraqi Geneva Convention Violation
|
|
(...) The US is mostly good (light grey) and the SH regime is almost completely bad (I can't think of anything good about it at the moment, but maybe there is somewhere some bureaucrat within it doing good). The Geneva convention has been mostly (...) (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Outrageous Iraqi Geneva Convention Violation
|
|
(...) Yes, for the love of everything sacred and holy!! Stop being!!! Oh wait... i forgot to finish that tho...(pause) What's this on the back of my hand? ;) I believe the word I was going to use was something along the lines of "Obtuse" or (...) (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Outrageous Iraqi Geneva Convention Violation
|
|
Don't drag the gun debate into this or you'll get responses like the following, which will derail the thread. (...) No, actually, assuming you're a law abiding citizen otherwise, with a healthy respect for the rights of others, and you've been (...) (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Outrageous Iraqi Geneva Convention Violation
|
|
(...) ***snipped*** Heh. I just don't want Mike throwing down on me when I call him on a fit of post hoc reasoning. Dave! (With very sparing use of the !) (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Outrageous Iraqi Geneva Convention Violation
|
|
(...) ... and Tony supports Bush on this.... even though some of my countrymen are held there. Scott A (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Outrageous Iraqi Geneva Convention Violation
|
|
(...) How's that again?? Not to go 'round and round with you about the specific *gun* issue, 'cause both you and I are unmoveable on that one, and we both know it... If one of *my* ideals is that guns are bad, but I go get a gun because now my (...) (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Outrageous Iraqi Geneva Convention Violation
|
|
(...) Let me try it from another tack. You may be contributing to breaking your ideals, yes, and I don't dispute that, but that's it. Your statement above only holds if it is necessarily true that law abiding citizens (you are law abiding) having (...) (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Outrageous Iraqi Geneva Convention Violation
|
|
(...) That's the good part--the "imho" Perhaps I should have stated that "All of the following are my ideals that I try to adhere to, and my reasons for doing so." But I don't think that covers your objection. So to stop the flogging of the dead (...) (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Outrageous Iraqi Geneva Convention Violation
|
|
(...) I am not saying we are all wrong -- we certainly do a lot of pointless, stupid, shallow things though. Pointing out those flaws is in my view being a good american because my point is the improvement of our circumstances. I have lost all hope (...) (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Outrageous Iraqi Geneva Convention Violation
|
|
(...) Okay, I'll work with that. You say that pointing out our flaws is part of being a good American. I think we can agree here; I would say that being a good American in part means being vigilant about protecting the ideals of our Constitution. My (...) (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | extra-judicial executions
|
|
(...) If pictures do exist, there are cultural reasons why we would not show them. That does not mean that extra-judicial executions are not occurring. I read this report from Afghanistan yesterday: One rule for them (URL) interviewed a Northern (...) (22 years ago, 26-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Geneva Convention Violation by Rumsfeld & "unlawful combatants"
|
|
(...) I understand there are outstanding cases [from both sides] from Vietnam & Korea. (...) This powerful text lists the articles that have been broken: One rule for them (URL) Bay, in Cuba, where 641 men (nine of whom are British citizens) are (...) (22 years ago, 26-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Outrageous Iraqi Geneva Convention Violation
|
|
(...) Fine. I really approve of the goals of the federal Constitution. Satisfied? We are such a long way from when the cup may have been half full at this point in time -- it is so clearly no more than half empty now. And how we can we free others (...) (22 years ago, 26-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | ...so much for winning hearts and minds. [was Re: Outrageous ...]
|
|
(...) The evidence suggests that your servicemen are not even look at flags: 'The Yank opened up. He had absolutely no regard for human life.' (URL) Alex MacEwen, 25, Lance Corporal of Horse Steven Gerrard, 33, and Trooper Chris Finney, 18, were (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: ...so much for winning hearts and minds. [was Re: Outrageous ...]
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes: <snip> can't comment on 'friendly fire'--Americans killed Canadians in same fashion in war games earlier... but this one-- (...) Was watching CNN all last night and this was the topic of concern-- (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | hearts and minds
|
|
(...) I don't blame the *allies* either. UK armed forces have been openly criticising "heavy handed" practices used by the US ground troops. Have a gander at this: British military critical of US troops' heavy-handed style with civilians (URL) (...) (22 years ago, 2-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | stormtroopers? [Re: hearts and minds]
|
|
On a not unrelated theme: (URL) A (22 years ago, 2-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
