|
Post by Charlie Minell on May 9, 2011 0:58:51 GMT -5
"However, the Parties to the conflict may take such measures of control and security in regard to protected persons as may be necessary as a result of the war." "when you have shot the 54 year old man in the eye, make sure to shoot him once more in the breast area to make sure he can't reach any button"
|
|
|
Post by Charlie Minell on May 9, 2011 1:00:26 GMT -5
Codes, rules out the window for this b.a.s.t.a.r.d.... i saw the live footage of people jumping to their death.. I would have killed jim nice and slow That was one horrible day out of many..
|
|
|
Post by Charlie Minell on May 9, 2011 1:01:29 GMT -5
I think you've painted him into a corner Charlie. Well played. I saw that one coming from this far away. Johnny, don't be offended, I'm not taking sides. I really enjoy a good argument/discussion. ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png) the goal was open.
|
|
|
Post by Johnny Edwards on May 9, 2011 1:02:23 GMT -5
You have to go by the Geneva codes in and act of war. So lets study up on those some.
|
|
|
Post by Johnny Edwards on May 9, 2011 1:06:48 GMT -5
US practice is that quarter must not be refused to someone that communicates an offer to surrender under circumstances that allows the offer to be understood and acted upon. At that point, they fall under the protection of the Geneva Conventions. But a combatant is not required to give his enemy an opportunity to surrender before attacking, and someone who currently appears incapable of attacking merely because he lost his weapon or is retreating and has not offered to surrender is still subject to attack. Someone who is incapable of resistance because of wounds, sickness or shipwreck is not subject to attack and if taken into custody is covered by the Geneva Conventions.
So in this case, if Bin Laden made no apparent effort to surrender, then he would be legally subject to attack. Things get further complicated by al Qaeda's taste for suicide bombers and explosive vests.
|
|
|
Post by Johnny Edwards on May 9, 2011 1:08:28 GMT -5
All in all as long as the official story is true this is a legal kill. Not murder but a legal kill.
|
|
|
Post by Johnny Edwards on May 9, 2011 1:15:01 GMT -5
Navy Seals attacking the compound were "law enforcement" officials rather than soldiers, and that Osama bin Laden was simply a criminal and not an enemy soldier. In short, that the criminal law, and not the law of war, governs this situation.
While this was unclear ten years ago when we were first confronted with a large-scale terrorist attack on the United States, it is now clear that massive acts of international terrorism may be considered both crime and war – that governments may treat large terrorist organizations either as enemy armies or as criminal organizations or both.
|
|
|
Post by Charlie Minell on May 9, 2011 1:16:20 GMT -5
All in all as long as the official story is true this is a legal kill. Not murder but a legal kill. There are many that think 9/11 was a day of legal kills also. You keep seeing it from only one angle..
|
|
|
Post by Johnny Edwards on May 9, 2011 1:16:26 GMT -5
Osama bin Laden was not in our custody. He was an active soldier in the war that he himself declared against the United States. In war one does not have to give enemy soldiers the opportunity to surrender. For example, bin Laden did not give the occupants of the World Trade Center that opportunity (in contravention to the law of war bin Laden drew no distinction between military and civilian targets). Under the law of war enemy soldiers may surrender if they choose. But they had better be quick, clear, and explicit that they are surrendering. Bin Laden could have surrendered to us at any time over the past decade, but he chose not to. When he heard the U.S. helicopters overhead he could have rushed out of the compound with his hands in the air and thereby protected his wife and children, but he chose not to. Nor did he raise his hands when our soldiers encountered him. It was his choice, and there is no doubt that it was lawful for us to kill him.
|
|
|
Post by Johnny Edwards on May 9, 2011 1:17:56 GMT -5
So your saying that people in the WTC were soldiers or criminals??? That there was a legal international jusification under the Geneva codes to validate a terrorist cell group to carry out attacks against innocent civilians??? The Geneva codes do not support that, try harder Charlie.
|
|
|
Post by Johnny Edwards on May 9, 2011 1:19:11 GMT -5
Your effectively saying that people in the WTC had carried out acts of war against a terrorst organization which is not even a state or country??? And gives their attacks legal justification??? The codes have to support, opinion doesn't. LMAO
|
|
|
Post by Charlie Minell on May 9, 2011 1:22:05 GMT -5
I wrote "There are many", Johnny. Did you take that as I think it was legal kills that day? Please tell me you are joking.
|
|
|
Post by Johnny Edwards on May 9, 2011 1:22:32 GMT -5
War crimes are serious violations of the laws applicable in armed conflict (Also known as International humanitarian law) giving rise to individual criminal responsibility. Examples of such conduct includes "murder, the ill-treatment or deportation of civilian residents of an occupied territory to slave labor camps", "the murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war", the killing of prisoners, "the wanton destruction of cities, towns and villages, and any devastation not justified by military, or civilian necessity".[1]
|
|
|
Post by Johnny Edwards on May 9, 2011 1:24:08 GMT -5
Well your arguing a point of view that backs up a terrorist point of view? ![???](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/huh.png) ? So what is someone to take from that?? I know your not a terrorist Charlie, your a really cool and a very friendly guy, Im just saying arguing the same things a terrorist would is a losing battle.
|
|
|
Post by Charlie Minell on May 9, 2011 1:25:45 GMT -5
I feel I'm done with this discussion. It was interesting to discuss with you! See you in another thread! ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png)
|
|