Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Calipari US classified report CRACKED!!!!

What's on your mind?
General interest discussions, not necessarily related to depletion.

Unread postby UncoveringTruths » Mon 02 May 2005, 12:28:01

"All is Fair in Love and War!" 8O
User avatar
UncoveringTruths
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 887
Joined: Thu 04 Nov 2004, 04:00:00

Unread postby eastbay » Mon 02 May 2005, 12:29:05

Unfortunately, I can't trust the military when it reports on this kind of thing anymore. Ever since we kept on insisting we'd shot a bunch of a terrorist meeting even after witnesses produced videos of the wedding, our credibility has been zero.

I too would certainly agree with that. But moreso, the underlying purpose in invading and occupying Iraq in the first place was based on a pack of lies. I trust nothing coming out of the US military or from the US government regarding the idiotic, wasteful and pointless military occupation of Iraq.

I certainly don't believe a single word from the US military regarding the cover-up of the killings of the Italian journalist.

And by the way, it's technically not a 'war-zone', it's an 'occupation-zone' with (mostly) local insurgents fighting to remove the invading forces.

EastBay
User avatar
eastbay
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7186
Joined: Sat 18 Dec 2004, 04:00:00
Location: One Mile From the Columbia River

Unread postby smallpoxgirl » Mon 02 May 2005, 12:54:41

The sad part of all this is you can blow away a car load of civilians and walk away scot free, but what do you want to bet that the guy that was responsible for redacting that report gets court martialed?
User avatar
smallpoxgirl
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7258
Joined: Mon 08 Nov 2004, 04:00:00

Unread postby rerere » Mon 02 May 2005, 13:06:13

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Specop_007', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rerere', 'B')ased on? You've made the claim, now back it up with the legal arguments.


We're not fighting an army. We're not fighting a "country". And lastly, the party we're fighting has not even, in any way shape or form, attempted to abide by the Geneva Convention.
Cutting off the heads of prisoners pretty much invalidates about any Humanitariam Treatment Treaty signed in, oh, since the inception of war.


Is that your 'legal' answer? A hippy-touchy-feely appeal to emotion? And your emotional appeal is to race to the bottom of bad behavior and not take the moral high ground and adhere to the Geneva Convention?

I would like to think that American Citizens would ask the American Govenrment to claim the moral high ground and not wollow in the mud, as it makes statements like 'The rape rooms of Saddam are closed for business' seem less credible.
User avatar
rerere
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 422
Joined: Fri 27 Aug 2004, 03:00:00

Unread postby threadbear » Mon 02 May 2005, 13:18:43

The "my country, right or wrong" crowd are in for a big surprise. Wait till the US starts using these techniques (targeted assassinations) on it's own citizens, on a regular basis.

In Stalinist Russia, it wasn't just those accused of being counter-revolutionaries, but even those who the so called counter revolutionaries associated with, in the most casual manner.

So keep braying like a demented pack of mules about how great your massively ridiculous country is, until you get hauled away for guilt by association crimes--like posting on message boards frequented by liberals.
User avatar
threadbear
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7577
Joined: Sat 22 Jan 2005, 04:00:00

Unread postby Roy » Mon 02 May 2005, 13:30:14

Traditionally, America has been the "good guys". We treated Japenese POWs fairly in spite of the way they treated US POWs.

Same with German POWs.

The highest levels of our government have authorized torture and the circumvention of the Geneva Convention. This is not the American way in the traditional sense.

The only people who see the US as the good guys are American citizens. If you don't see anything wrong with that then I think you need to study history a little more. Again parallels.

No one even responded to the ideal that Italians would likely have been aware of the American Forces rules of engagement (IE fire on vehicles approaching checkpoints that don't respond to command to stop).

How would military men not know this? How could the Italians have entered the Green Zone without passing through AT LEAST one American Checkpoint? They couldn't have. Are our communcations that inefficient?

I think not. Even in the 40's our communications network was effective enough to facilitate communication between security checkpoints.

Am I to believe that our modern high tech army doesn't have radios with a 2 mile range?

That the Italians didn't know they would be attacked if they attempted to run a checkpoint?

No. I believe there was no formal checkpoint as such. If the Italians didn't know about our rules of engagement and checkpoint procedures, they would never have made it to within 800 meters of the airport. No way. They would've been fired upon at the heavily fortified entrance to the Green Zone no?

Something here is causing me a little cognitive dissonance.

This thing reeks of secretive coverups by the US government. Further proof of suspicious motives is the mainstream media, FOX in particular, attacking Segrena as an American hating communist.

Do you guys get the picture? Most of the world who aren't on the dole don't like the current American government or their foreign policy.

One has to ask why. Are we really in the right if most of the world doesn't think so?

I don't think so.
Roy
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 1359
Joined: Fri 18 Jun 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Getting in touch with my Inner Redneck

Unread postby big_rc » Mon 02 May 2005, 13:43:05

Specop,

I think what you are missing here is that is doesn't matter if the car was speeding to a checkpoint or not. The point is that the US is handling this situation so poorly that Condi should be slapped upside the head. Is US foreign policy being run by idiots? We should be prostrating ourselves before the Italians and every other word out of Bush's mouth should be "sorry". Bush or Cheney should have been on a plane to Rome the next day after this incident occured. Seriously, where in the hell is the diplomacy? Why didn't they find the soldiers in some kind of error to not piss off the Italians even more then make some type of serious face-saving reparations to appease everyone's hurt feelings. This is not freaking brain surgery and we are about to lose another ally for this stupid war because of our diplomatic stupidty.

Edit: Does anyone know if the US has issued a formal apology for this incident? I hope so, because if they didn't, that is just plain stupid.
Simon's Law: Everything put together falls apart sooner or later.

I don't think of all the misery, but of all the beauty that still remains.--Anne Frank
User avatar
big_rc
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Sat 17 Jul 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Amerika (most of the time)

Unread postby threadbear » Mon 02 May 2005, 13:55:59

Big RC, The more I watch what's going on--the complete disregard for consensus building, and international opinion, the more I become convinced that Bushco's ultimate goal is to control the Middle East, using bunker buster nukes. They simply refuse to waste precious resources on maintaining a public relations facade, at this point. I am fully expecting that Israel is going to act as the proxy to destroy Iran and likely Syria. It will be quite amusing when the two mobsters, Sharon and company, and Bush and company, start fighting over the spoils of war. This will not work out to Israel's advantage. I would be so outta there, if I was a citizen of either country.
User avatar
threadbear
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7577
Joined: Sat 22 Jan 2005, 04:00:00

Unread postby Specop_007 » Mon 02 May 2005, 21:47:11

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('big_rc', 'S')pecop,

I think what you are missing here is that is doesn't matter if the car was speeding to a checkpoint or not. The point is that the US is handling this situation so poorly that Condi should be slapped upside the head. Is US foreign policy being run by idiots? We should be prostrating ourselves before the Italians and every other word out of Bush's mouth should be "sorry". Bush or Cheney should have been on a plane to Rome the next day after this incident occured. Seriously, where in the hell is the diplomacy? Why didn't they find the soldiers in some kind of error to not piss off the Italians even more then make some type of serious face-saving reparations to appease everyone's hurt feelings. This is not freaking brain surgery and we are about to lose another ally for this stupid war because of our diplomatic stupidty.

Edit: Does anyone know if the US has issued a formal apology for this incident? I hope so, because if they didn't, that is just plain stupid.


EXACTLY! THATS the issue. And I'll agree 110%. It isnt the fact this was a honest mistake, its how we're handling it.
But everyone wants to assume for some reason that the American version of the story is someone wrong, simply because they are being blinded by their hatred of America. If America provided irrefutable proof that the car was speeding towards the checkpoint, most of the twits around here (And other liberal sites) would STILL say we were wrong, we were to blame.
"Battle not with monsters, lest ye become a monster, and if you gaze into the
Abyss, the Abyss gazes also into you."

Ammo at a gunfight is like bubblegum in grade school: If you havent brought enough for everyone, you're in trouble
User avatar
Specop_007
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5586
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2004, 03:00:00

Unread postby Specop_007 » Mon 02 May 2005, 21:49:56

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rerere', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Specop_007', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rerere', 'B')ased on? You've made the claim, now back it up with the legal arguments.


We're not fighting an army. We're not fighting a "country". And lastly, the party we're fighting has not even, in any way shape or form, attempted to abide by the Geneva Convention.
Cutting off the heads of prisoners pretty much invalidates about any Humanitariam Treatment Treaty signed in, oh, since the inception of war.


Is that your 'legal' answer? A hippy-touchy-feely appeal to emotion? And your emotional appeal is to race to the bottom of bad behavior and not take the moral high ground and adhere to the Geneva Convention?

I would like to think that American Citizens would ask the American Govenrment to claim the moral high ground and not wollow in the mud, as it makes statements like 'The rape rooms of Saddam are closed for business' seem less credible.


touchy feely?
Explain to me how the Geneva Convention applies to a terrorist organization not recognized by any country in the world as any type of standing military? The Geneva Convention does not apply, its simple as that. I suggest you read it.

So let me ask you, why is it your so damned concerned about a couple naked pictures, but seeing peoples heads being cut off doesnt bother you? Know why? Because, your so deadset in your ignorant "America is wrong" belief that NOTHING could possibly overshadow some naked pictures. Getting your head hacked off with a rusty knife is ok, but God forbid we make them pose naked. Oh the tragedy. Oh the horror.

Your a damned disgrace. Approving of cutting off heads, but bitching about a bunch of college type pranks? Yeah, real good argument there.
"Battle not with monsters, lest ye become a monster, and if you gaze into the
Abyss, the Abyss gazes also into you."

Ammo at a gunfight is like bubblegum in grade school: If you havent brought enough for everyone, you're in trouble
User avatar
Specop_007
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5586
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Top

Unread postby dauterman » Mon 02 May 2005, 22:52:11

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Hawkcreek', '
')And my son said that they blew up damn near the whole city the old fashioned way - conventional firepower. They didn't need Wiley Peter or Napalm, so why use it?


Hi,

I hate to ask a stupid question, but what is Wiley Peter? I did a search on google for "Wiley Peter Fallujah" and came up with:

Cellist Peter Wiley has played twice in Fallujah, Iraq.
User avatar
dauterman
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 73
Joined: Tue 05 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Unread postby smallpoxgirl » Mon 02 May 2005, 23:22:02

Willy Pete=WP=White Phosphorous
User avatar
smallpoxgirl
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7258
Joined: Mon 08 Nov 2004, 04:00:00

Check and mate. You loose SpecOp_007. Again.

Unread postby rerere » Mon 02 May 2005, 23:53:51

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Specop_007', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rerere', '
')
Is that your 'legal' answer? A hippy-touchy-feely appeal to emotion? .


touchy feely?


That is exactly what I said. You have a problem with it? Your approach to this matter is to put words in others mouth and make emotional appeals rather than logic or even law.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Specop_007', '
')Explain to me how the Geneva Convention applies to a terrorist organization not recognized by any country in the world as any type of standing military?


From http://www.cdi.org/news/law/defense-mon ... -abuse.cfm
"The Geneva Conventions protecting POWs and civilians in times of occupation broadly prohibit torture and other inhumane treatment, but also specifically bar coercive interrogations — the use of inhumane treatment in an attempt to extract information. Published U.S. Army intelligence doctrine and detainee regulations acknowledge those requirements, as they must. In addition to the fact that the Abu Ghraib disaster otherwise violated U.S. law, the U.S. Constitution declares binding international treaties, such as the Geneva Conventions, to be part of the supreme law of the land. Along with federal statutes, in the hierarchy of U.S. law they are subordinate only to the Constitution itself."


$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Specop_007', '
')The Geneva Convention does not apply, its simple as that. I suggest you read it.


Again, based on what? So far all I see is your hand waving rants. *yawn*

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Specop_007', '
')So let me ask you, why is it your so damned concerned about a couple naked pictures, but seeing peoples heads being cut off doesnt bother you? Know why? Because, your so deadset in your ignorant "America is wrong" belief that NOTHING could possibly overshadow some naked pictures. Getting your head hacked off with a rusty knife is ok, but God forbid we make them pose naked. Oh the tragedy. Oh the horror.

Exaclty what I mean by a touchy-feely-hippie emotional appeal. AND this time you attempt to put these emotions as mine.


$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Specop_007', '
')Your a damned disgrace.


I'm a damn disgrace based on words YOU have chosen to place in my mouth? Go visit a shrink and get your head checked out.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Specop_007', '
') Approving of cutting off heads, but bitching about a bunch of college type pranks? Yeah, real good argument there.

Again, the 'argument' is all in your head. For no where have I claimed to approve or disapprove of 'head cutting off'.

Very easy to 'win' an argument when you hand wave and set up the whole basis in your own head.

I however will allow actual lawyers to make their point VS the continued handwaving of Specop_007.

http://www.cdi.org/news/law/defense-mon ... -abuse.cfm
http://www.cdi.org/news/law/gc-responsibility.cfm

http://www.academicinfo.net/iraqabuse.html

WARNER: Most significant, the replaying of these images day after day throughout the Middle East and indeed the world has the potential to undermine the substantial gains -- emphasize the substantial gains -- toward the goal of peace and freedom in various operation areas of the world, most particularly Iraq, and the substantial sacrifice by our forces, those of our allies, in the war on terror.

Let me be as clear as one senator can be: This is not the way for anyone who wears the uniform of the United States of America to conduct themselves.

If Specop_007 is right, why is Warner making this statement?

LEVIN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The abuses that were committed against prisoners in U.S. custody at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq dishonored our military and our nation

If Specop_007 is right, why does Levin find dishonor?

The final nail in the Specop_007 is proven wrong and uninformed yet again:

RUMSFELD: Well, the -- as the chief of staff of the Army can tell you, the guards are trained to guard people. They're not trained to interrogate, they're not -- and their instructions are to, in the case of Iraq, adhere to the Geneva Convention.

The Geneva Conventions apply to all of the individuals there in one way or another. They apply to the prisoners of war, and they are written out and they're instructed and the people in the Army train them to that and the people in the Central Command have the responsibility of seeing that, in fact, their conduct is consistent with the Geneva Conventions.

The criminals in the same detention facility are handled under a different provision of the Geneva Convention -- I believe it's the fourth and the prior one's the third.

Huh. If SpecOp_007 is correct, why does Donald Rumsfeld say they are covered?
User avatar
rerere
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 422
Joined: Fri 27 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Top

Unread postby Specop_007 » Mon 02 May 2005, 23:59:20

Hey re, you should know as well as I do. The world will turn the other cheek to someone getting their head cut off, but will rise up and scream foul over some naked pictures.
What we're doing is called "damage control" and trying to appear to be "civilized".

I think its a load of shit, but essentially it comes down to this. To keep the liberals from screaming foul over some naked pictures we have to show our support of the Geneva Convention and "proper treatment" of prisoners but its funny just how silent everyone is about people getting thier goddamned HEAD CUT OFF.

Typical world response from the haters. "America is bad! America is wrong!" but no one says a damned thing with what the terrorists do do they? Nope, not one thing.
"Battle not with monsters, lest ye become a monster, and if you gaze into the
Abyss, the Abyss gazes also into you."

Ammo at a gunfight is like bubblegum in grade school: If you havent brought enough for everyone, you're in trouble
User avatar
Specop_007
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5586
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2004, 03:00:00

Unread postby smallpoxgirl » Tue 03 May 2005, 00:10:18

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Specop_007', 'T')ypical world response from the haters. "America is bad! America is wrong!" but no one says a damned thing with what the terrorists do do they? Nope, not one thing.


Ya know what Specop, when "The Terrorists" start extorting money from me to buy nuclear bombs and tanks, I'll get upset about what they're doing. For now "The Terrorists" all live thousands of miles away from me and all the folks terrorizing me have little red, white, and blue flags sewn on their shoulders.
User avatar
smallpoxgirl
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7258
Joined: Mon 08 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Top

Unread postby rerere » Tue 03 May 2005, 00:14:18

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Specop_007', 'H')ey re, you should know as well as I do.


That you were wrong about your position on the events WRT the Geneva Convention, yea.

I also note that a violation of the Geneva Convention is also unconstituional. So to support a violation of the Geneva Convention means you oppose the Constitution - the law of the land.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Specop_007', '
')What we're doing is called "damage control" and trying to appear to be "civilized".


Really? Are you sure? Because, gosh, I thought the mility was well trained and part of that training is in following the Geneva Convention.

Now, if the military lacks armor, batteries (per the Durcell send batteries to the troops), coffee (per the send coffee to the troops), needs soft clothes sent to snipers (the adopt a sniper idea) AND are so poorly trained they can't scramble a few jets to intercept some planes not to mention do not understand the Geneva Convention then by God, the government needs more tax dollars to properly pay for the military.

Yet, no one is increasing taxes to PAY for a better military.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Specop_007', '
')I think its a load of shit


Yea, the damn cheapscapes who won't pay for their warrior class.

Almost as bad as the people who won't admit they were wrong about 1 page Constitutions or the Geneva Convention.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Specop_007', '
'), but essentially it comes down to this. To keep the liberals from screaming foul over some naked pictures we have to show our support of the Geneva Convention


Huh. So Warner and Rumsfeld are "liberals"?

De-Nile. Its not a middle east destination, its where SpecOp_007's head is at.
User avatar
rerere
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 422
Joined: Fri 27 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Top

Unread postby threadbear » Tue 03 May 2005, 00:18:55

Specop, I find it hard to take you seriously. As a matter of fact, I don't think you're sincere at all, just playing a part. But that's okay, because you encourage discussion.

As far as people getting their heads cut off, this is why so many people, including Sen. John McCain nearly blew a gasket about the Abu Ghraib tortures. The heads started to roll after Abu Ghraib, partly as a reaction to it--a bit of a tit for tat.

And Yes, Speccop, America has become evil, in the eyes of the world, and the character you play is a perfect example why. That you would refer to acts that include the rape of young boys in these prisons, simply the taking of "naked pictures" reflects a sordid mentality that would be disturbing, if it was real.
User avatar
threadbear
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7577
Joined: Sat 22 Jan 2005, 04:00:00

Unread postby rerere » Tue 03 May 2005, 00:24:46

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', 'T')hat you would refer to acts that include the rape of young boys in these prisons, simply the taking of "naked pictures"


I believe:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Specop_007', '
')a bunch of college type pranks

was another phrase used. I don't know what college has rape of young boys, but SpecOP_007 knows.

And, please don't share with us if you were a top or bottom, and if you were the young boy, m'kay SpecOp_007?
User avatar
rerere
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 422
Joined: Fri 27 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Top

Rumsfeld spells out how wrong SpecOP_007 is.

Unread postby rerere » Tue 03 May 2005, 00:29:02

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Specop_007', 'T')he Geneva Convention doesnt apply to us there. That point should be no argument.


Once again:

MCCAIN: Were the instructions to the guards...

RUMSFELD: There's two sets of responsibilities, as your question suggests. One set is the people who have the responsibility for managing the detention process; they are not interrogators. The military intelligence people, as General Smith has indicated, were the people who were in charge of the interrogation part of the process.

And the responsibility, as I have reviewed the matter, shifted over a period of time and the general is capable of telling you when that responsibility shifted.

MCCAIN: What were the instructions to the guards?

RUMSFELD: That is what the investigation that I have indicated has been undertaken...

MCCAIN: Mr. Secretary...

RUMSFELD: ... is determining...

MCCAIN: ... that's a very simple, straight-forward question.

RUMSFELD: Well, the -- as the chief of staff of the Army can tell you, the guards are trained to guard people. They're not trained to interrogate, they're not -- and their instructions are to, in the case of Iraq, adhere to the Geneva Convention.

The Geneva Conventions apply to all of the individuals there in one way or another. They apply to the prisoners of war, and they are written out and they're instructed and the people in the Army train them to that and the people in the Central Command have the responsibility of seeing that, in fact, their conduct is consistent with the Geneva Conventions.

The criminals in the same detention facility are handled under a different provision of the Geneva Convention -- I believe it's the fourth and the prior one's the third.

MCCAIN: So the guards were instructed to treat the prisoners, under some kind of changing authority as I understand it, according to the Geneva Conventions?

RUMSFELD: Absolutely.

MCCAIN: I thank you, Mr. Chairman.

WARNER: Thank you, Senator.


Once again: Rumsfeld says your position is shown to not be correct SpecOp_007.
User avatar
rerere
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 422
Joined: Fri 27 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Top

GW Bush announced SpecOP_007 is wrong too.

Unread postby rerere » Tue 03 May 2005, 00:39:45

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Specop_007', 'T')he Geneva Convention doesnt apply to us there. That point should be no argument.


RUMSFELD: Oh no, the president announced from the outset that everyone in Iraq who was a military person and was detained is a prisoner of war, and therefore the Geneva Conventions apply.

And second, the decision was made that the civilians or criminal elements that are detainees are also treated subject to the Geneva Convention, although it's a different element of it. I think it's the 4th instead of the 3rd.
User avatar
rerere
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 422
Joined: Fri 27 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Top

PreviousNext

Return to Open Topic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron