American Torture in Iraq

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Where does the buck stop? Who is the Commander in Chief?

Depends on what's going on...ask Janet Reno...her idea is apparently in conflict with yours.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[Gravitymaster 0]

"However, I did take part in free-fire zones, I did take part in harassment and interdiction fire, I did take part in search-and-destroy missions in which the houses of noncombatants were burned to the ground. And all of these acts, I find out later on, are contrary to the Hague and Geneva conventions and to the laws of warfare. So in that sense, anybody who took part in those, if you carry out the application of the Nuremberg Principles, is in fact guilty.-John Kerry

[billvon 3,119]

>Then why haven't we invaded Saudi Arabia yet?

Cause they supply a good percentage of our oil, and were more cooperative than Afghanistan was.

[pajarito 0]

Quote

Where does the buck stop? Who is the Commander in Chief?

Man...are you really serious? So you think GWB should be fired because some troops got out of line and broke the rules? Don't you think the the leader in theatre is the one responsible for the troops under him? Don't you think that it's GWB's job to set policy and see that it is enforced? That's what's going to happen. The ones that did this will be brought to justice.

The left's spewing hatred for GWB really knows no bounds. It really appears that they're grabbing in desperation for a hand-hold but are loosing their grip.

[billvon 3,119]

>So in that sense, anybody who took part in those, if you carry out the
>application of the Nuremberg Principles, is in fact guilty.

So you are saying that our soldiers in Iraq who participated in free-fire zones, who laid down interdiction fire, and who destroyed the houses of noncombatants - are guilty? How do you plan on prosecuting them?

[Nightingale 0]

Hey!

Will you PLEASE quit generalizing??!!

I'm a leftie. I don't think Bush had anything to do with this. He's not responsible. The individual soldiers and their COs are. Just like Bush isn't responsible for 9/11. The morons who decided that flying airplanes into buildings was a good idea are responsible.

Just because someone is a liberal does not mean their brain has fallen out their ears.

[Gawain 0]

Quote

>So in that sense, anybody who took part in those, if you carry out the
>application of the Nuremberg Principles, is in fact guilty.

So you are saying that our soldiers in Iraq who participated in free-fire zones, who laid down interdiction fire, and who destroyed the houses of noncombatants - are guilty? How do you plan on prosecuting them?

Ask John Kerry, that's who said it. See how little sense it makes now?

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

>So in that sense, anybody who took part in those, if you carry out the
>application of the Nuremberg Principles, is in fact guilty.

So you are saying that our soldiers in Iraq who participated in free-fire zones, who laid down interdiction fire, and who destroyed the houses of noncombatants - are guilty? How do you plan on prosecuting them?

Why don't we ask John Kerry. He's running for President. He is admitting he's a war criminal. Still going to vote for him? Go back and read "Winter Soldier"

[mr2mk1g 10]

Maybe because it claims to be an active part of the fight against international terrorism?

Maybe because its the closest thing the Arab world has to a democracy?

Maybe its beacuse to do so would generate such widespread condemnation from the rest of the Arab League - Saudi Arabia is not seen as a pariah state as Iraq and Afganistan were by even other arabs?

Maybe we should have done?

[PhillyKev 0]

Quote

Did you mean to say non-classified? Of course, classified stuff is kept secret.

Yes.

I would hope that this type of thing is dealt with sufficiently, too. I'm just putting out there that one of the accused, in letters he wrote home before they were caught talked about how they were acting under the direction and approval of military intelligence organizations, the pentagon asked 60 minutes to delay airing the tape, and didn't formally charge anyone until after it was made public.

Hey, I don't blame them. I wish they could have taken care of this in a fair way so that justice was served and without this kind of propaganda being made available to the enemy. Like I said, I'm sure this was an isolated incident but is going to have huge repurcussions. I'm just calling it like I see it.

[billvon 3,119]

>Why don't we ask John Kerry.

I'm asking you. Do you feel that soldiers who, under orders, participate in free-fire zones, lay down interdiction fire, or who destroy houses of noncombatants, are guilty of war crimes? It's a simple enough question, really. (Although I have a feeling you will refuse to answer, since you would abhor admitting that Kerry faced some of the same situations that all soldiers do.)

[PhillyKev 0]

Quote

Why don't we ask John Kerry. He's running for President. He is admitting he's a war criminal.

So if he wins that will be the first two criminals in a row to be elected to the White House. I'm not sure though, should we differentiate that GWB has an actual criminal conviction from a court of law?

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

>Why don't we ask John Kerry.

I'm asking you. Do you feel that soldiers who, under orders, participate in free-fire zones, lay down interdiction fire, or who destroy houses of noncombatants, are guilty of war crimes? It's a simple enough question, really. (Although I have a feeling you will refuse to answer, since you would abhor admitting that Kerry faced some of the same situations that all soldiers do.)

Answer my question first. Are you going to vote for a self admitted war criminal?

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

Why don't we ask John Kerry. He's running for President. He is admitting he's a war criminal.

So if he wins that will be the first two criminals in a row to be elected to the White House. I'm not sure though, should we differentiate that GWB has an actual criminal conviction from a court of law?

Isn't it you who is always harping about people changing the subject?

[pajarito 0]

Quote

Hey!

Will you PLEASE quit generalizing??!!

I'm a leftie. I don't think Bush had anything to do with this. He's not responsible. The individual soldiers and their COs are. Just like Bush isn't responsible for 9/11. The morons who decided that flying airplanes into buildings was a good idea are responsible.

Just because someone is a liberal does not mean their brain has fallen out their ears.

Lo siento mucho. You guys/girls that aren't hanging off the left side with one hand aren't so bad. No more generalizations.

[billvon 3,119]

>Answer my question first. Are you going to vote for a self admitted
>war criminal?

I don't know yet. I'm not voting for Bush unless he can fix three years of mistakes in the remaining six months. Who I do vote for remains to be seen. I may end up voting libertarian just to increase their percentages slightly; this would tend to get libertarian ideals absorbed by whichever party wants to attract the libertarian vote.

So you gonna answer my question?

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

>Answer my question first. Are you going to vote for a self admitted
>war criminal?

I don't know yet. I'm not voting for Bush unless he can fix three years of mistakes in the remaining six months. Who I do vote for remains to be seen. I may end up voting libertarian just to increase their percentages slightly; this would tend to get libertarian ideals absorbed by whichever party wants to attract the libertarian vote.

So you gonna answer my question?

Sure. I don't know.

[billvon 3,119]

>Sure. I don't know.

Cool! So you don't know if what Kerry did makes him a war criminal. Honest answer.

[pajarito 0]

Quote

Quote

Did you mean to say non-classified? Of course, classified stuff is kept secret.

Yes.

I would hope that this type of thing is dealt with sufficiently, too. I'm just putting out there that one of the accused, in letters he wrote home before they were caught talked about how they were acting under the direction and approval of military intelligence organizations, the pentagon asked 60 minutes to delay airing the tape, and didn't formally charge anyone until after it was made public.

Hey, I don't blame them. I wish they could have taken care of this in a fair way so that justice was served and without this kind of propaganda being made available to the enemy. Like I said, I'm sure this was an isolated incident but is going to have huge repurcussions. I'm just calling it like I see it.

"Classification" also has different levels. Just a thought. That's cool, though.

[billvon 3,119]

>Ask John Kerry, that's who said it. See how little sense it makes now?

?? It makes sense to me. Many soldiers who come back from war look back on what they did - who they killed and who they maimed - with horror. It doesn't mean they are war criminals, whether they served in Vietnam or Iraq. It just means they are human.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

>Sure. I don't know.

Cool! So you don't know if what Kerry did makes him a war criminal. Honest answer.

I never said I did. I said Kerry is a self-admitted war criminal. He apparently thinks he is so the question you have should be put to him. Is he going to prosecute GIs who have committed what he deems to be criminal acts?

[pajarito 0]

Just heard on the news that GWB vows that the ones responsible will be facing a court-martial.

[Nightingale 0]

No habla Espanol. Por favor explique en Ingles?

[PhillyKev 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Why don't we ask John Kerry. He's running for President. He is admitting he's a war criminal.

So if he wins that will be the first two criminals in a row to be elected to the White House. I'm not sure though, should we differentiate that GWB has an actual criminal conviction from a court of law?

Isn't it you who is always harping about people changing the subject?

I stayed on subject with your post. You're the one who brought up John Kerry in a thread that has absolutely nothing to do with him.

[Gawain 0]

Quote

>Ask John Kerry, that's who said it. See how little sense it makes now?

?? It makes sense to me. Many soldiers who come back from war look back on what they did - who they killed and who they maimed - with horror. It doesn't mean they are war criminals, whether they served in Vietnam or Iraq. It just means they are human.

Not according to Kerry, based on that quote.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!