Freedom of Choice

[Trotterwatch]

the problem is you run a selective argument here. for instance you apply the geneva convention where it suits you, like here. on the other side when it comes to locking up "terrorists" without trial and holding them in military prisons you dont give a rats ass about the geneva convention. which one is it?

He is applying it because it is applicable. He can be selective if he wants. Perhaps he just doesn't think terrorists should have their arses licked instead of kicked when they get their just deserts

second, the legal liability to reject illegal orders is a completely theoretical matter. practice shows that the fewest soldiers actually make use of that.

Well John Kerry has shown himself to be weak willed then, right?

 

[vampireuk]

heh, sense? you mean the sense you suddenly developed when i lost the grip around your opinion and you suddenly faded from black to white in just about all issues? at least im consistent. i dont just wave a red flag, i know why i do.

Considering the fact the only thing I have changed my views on his defence it is quite foolish to say I have changed on everything, I'm consistent on everything else, I just now believe in taking the fight to them. Of course like most pinkos they love ignoring the facts

the problem is you run a selective argument here. for instance you apply the geneva convention where it suits you, like here. on the other side when it comes to locking up "terrorists" without trial and holding them in military prisons you dont give a rats ass about the geneva convention. which one is it?

There is a difference between shooting at civilians and burning down villages and locking up terrorists, you know this yet you chose to be a idealist who prefers to ignore reality and sit in his little hippy world. Now who is trying to make things black and white huh? I don't know how anyone can compare a terrorist life to a civilian life.

second, the legal liability to reject illegal orders is a completely theoretical matter. practice shows that the fewest soldiers actually make use of that

Got any proof of that? I believe the only example you will find is that Iraqi prison where the poor terrorists got stuck in a naked pyramid

The fact is you know bugger all about the military and yet you condemn it at every given oppurtunity.

 

[vampireuk]

He is applying it because it is applicable. He can be selective if he wants. Perhaps he just doesn't think terrorists should have their arses licked instead of kicked when they get their just deserts

Damn straight, I don't give two shits if a terrorist has a flashlight stuck up his arse, I hope he squeels like a little piggy before they put two bullets in his head.

Well John Kerry has shown himself to be weak willed then, right?

While in a warzone and while in the senate. He is not fit to run the country at all, he has voted against pretty much all bills to help the military.

Edit: as for selective argument, your entire argument is that the US is killing Iraqis, care to come out of that glass house before you start tossing stones?

 

[vampireuk]

Oooh a triple post, ah well it's worth it. I present to you all, a American soldier and his candlestick

 

[2fast4u]

He is applying it because it is applicable. He can be selective if he wants. Perhaps he just doesn't think terrorists should have their arses licked instead of kicked when they get their just deserts

you mean like in guantanamo where most people who were released from there after diplomatic pressure went scott-free because they hadnt actually done anything?

 

[2fast4u]

There is a difference between shooting at civilians and burning down villages and locking up terrorists, you know this yet you chose to be a idealist who prefers to ignore reality and sit in his little hippy world. Now who is trying to make things black and white huh? I don't know how anyone can compare a terrorist life to a civilian life.

/me lights up a joint and turns on the lava lamp

you know perfectly well that before law everyone is supposed to be equal. you dont seem to care about the fact that many people who are arrested as suspected terrorists have never been proven of their guilt yet they had to put up with unhumane conditions.

other than that, do you really think we have the right to treat criminals just like they would treat us? or doesnt that just takes us to the same level?

Got any proof of that? I believe the only example you will find is that Iraqi prison where the poor terrorists got stuck in a naked pyramid

yes i do. vietnam. and john kerry nuff said.

 

[vampireuk]

And we should simply risk setting free potential terrorists simply because they say they are not terrorists? They were released because they were deemed to not be a danger. I know you want to see terrorists treated as equals and let loose so they can bomb some more innocent people, but here in the real world we do not want that

 

[2fast4u]

Well John Kerry has shown himself to be weak willed then, right?

yup, but im not defending john kerry. im such a troll im putting down military in general. see what im making here?

 

[2fast4u]

And we should simply risk setting free potential terrorists simply because they say they are not terrorists? They were released because they were deemed to not be a danger. I know you want to see terrorists treated as equals and let loose so they can bomb some more innocent people, but here in the real world we do not want that

read above reply.

 

[vampireuk]

you know perfectly well that before law everyone is supposed to be equal. you dont seem to care about the fact that many people who are arrested as suspected terrorists have never been proven of their guilt yet they had to put up with unhumane conditions.

other than that, do you really think we have the right to treat criminals just like they would treat us? or doesnt that just takes us to the same level?

Terrorists and criminals are again different, I honestly do not give a shit about the life of a terrorist.

 

[vampireuk]

read above reply.

So we should instantly set everybody free because they may not be terrorists? Why was I in Afganistan holding a AK-47? I was ermm, picking daffodils to give to the US troops!

 

[2fast4u]

So we should instantly set everybody free because they may not be terrorists? Why was I in Afganistan holding a AK-47? I was ermm, picking daffodils to give to the US troops!

hell no but holding prisoners in humane conditions and offering them access to a lawyer would be a start! justice system and all that, you may have heard of it.

 

[vampireuk]

hell no but holding prisoners in humane conditions and offering them access to a lawyer would be a start! justice system and all that, you may have heard of it.

What you mean those terrible conditions where they were actually getting fat from the food they were allowed? Terrorists are people too!

 

[2fast4u]

What you mean those terrible conditions where they were actually getting fat from the food they were allowed? Terrorists are people too!

what the fuck are you talking about?

 

[vampireuk]

Something you obviously have not done much research on, the detained people at gitmo bay were getting overweight from all the food they were getting, hardly seems like inhumane conditions to me when they are getting fattenend up at the tax payers expense.

Erm perhaps you should do some research on things you argue about instead of asking what the fuck people are talking about when they mention something you had no idea about

 

[vampireuk]

http://snopes.com/rumors/charlie2.asp

Regarding camp Delta, doesn't sound too horrible to me....

 

[2fast4u]

most of that article is editorial ... not much on the actual conditions.

here is something else for you:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/manchester/features/2004/03/30/jamal.shtml

Home from Guantanamo Bay - Jamal al-Harith tells his story

He was flown to Cuba in chains and locked up without trial for two years. Jamal al-Harith from Moss Side was held as a suspected Islamic terrorist at Guantanamo Bay before his release without charge in March 2003 ...

There, Jamal - a father of three - says he was kept in a wire cage on a concrete floor, beaten, interrogated dozens of times, injected against his will and spent time in isolation, thousands of miles from his family.

yeah, sounds peachy to me. this is just one prime example you can find if you look at the stories of those who were released.

i dunno ... do you really think its a great idea to lock up people without giving them trials or access to a lawyer or stuff like that? or abuse? you probably say you dont care because they deserve it but thats not really a valid argument.

btw, in regard to research: as you are obviously aware of im posting quite a lot from work so i dont really have time or motivation to do huge google-runs...

 

[vampireuk]

There, Jamal - a father of three - says he was kept in a wire cage on a concrete floor, beaten, interrogated dozens of times, injected against his will and spent time in isolation, thousands of miles from his family

And we have only his word on that...

So you say what I posted is a editorial, so you respond by posting a editorial too. The link I posted does in fact cover the conditions there? Did you read all of the article because if you did then you would have read about the conditions they were held in. And how camp X-ray was a temporary centre and now a dedicated holding facility is set up. Also Red Cross with a on-site presence there. Like I said, the conditions in the article I posted were described quite well, either you didn't read the entire article or you chose to ignore it since it doesn't suit what you believe

 

[2fast4u]

And we have only his word on that...

there is a good chance this singing guy visiting gitmo didnt get to see quite everything, dont you think? i think the story of someone who was there weighs a little more than this, while obviously it might be exegerated.

Also Red Cross with a on-site presence there.

iirc the red cross presence didnt get there by itself but was established after international outrage (even mr. blair noticed).

or you chose to ignore it since it doesn't suit what you

right back atcha...you choose to take what that page says for granted without a sign of doubt.

oh, and you still havent expressed yourself regarding locking people up without trial.

 

[vampireuk]

iirc the red cross presence didnt get there by itself but was established after international outrage (even mr. blair noticed).

So even though there is a red cross presence there it doesn't count because they didn't get a pink invitation card with frilly edges?

there is a good chance this singing guy visiting gitmo didnt get to see quite everything, dont you think? i think the story of someone who was there weighs a little more than this, while obviously it might be exegerated

And there is a good chance that the guy who was arrested is full of shit and making everything up.

right back atcha...you choose to take what that page says for granted without a sign of doubt

They get fed 3 times a day, they get medical treatment, they have a bed and they have a copy of that pos religous book they all love. Hmm I must be taking things for granted considering they have a lot more than they deserve. The sheer barbarian standards the US have put them, serving caviar at room temperature, infidels!

As for lawyers, fuck em. The detained have valuble military intelligence that could be lost if they get the chance to talk to legal representation. Until all information that can be extracted from them is removed they should not be given any legal aid of any sort, once they are finished simply shoot them in the head and turn their rotting flesh into fertilizer.

Edit: also if you don't have much time for research then why don't you spend the time you spend posting your arguments researching first, then post a rebuttal.