This guy is so fired

yes, he was an asshole.

yes he should have been removed from power.

through legitimate means.

elsewhere in the world there are other assholes of the same nature who are not being removed from power by these same means, and some are being backed, through back channels by the US government.


We had 'legitimate means' the first time he fired SAMs at coalition aircraft during Clinton's administration. That popping sound would be you pulling your head out. ;)
 
Very few of them are Iraqi. These people are sadistic sociopaths that have found a place to get their jollies!!
Most wars are filled with such folx as these, plus others who use war as a cover for rape, theft, and other atrocities. War is hell

1949. Geneva Convention articles 4 & 5.

Like most plans, the Geneva convention is not bullet-proof
literally nor figuratively, nor do they survive long after first contact.
Rules of war are pretty things to trot out when you're talking about two well-delineated armies meeting on a specific field far from pedestrians. Good for generals, not necessarily so for soldiers and certainly not for civilians.
 
Like most plans, the Geneva convention is not bullet-proof
literally nor figuratively, nor do they survive long after first contact.
Rules of war are pretty things to trot out when you're talking about two well-delineated armies meeting on a specific field far from pedestrians. Good for generals, not necessarily so for soldiers and certainly not for civilians.

Gimmeabreak. If soldiers do not follow those rules, then they aren't soldiers. They're criminals. Any government that allows their military to go against the convention is foolhardy at best.

As for the rest of that statement, its all :bs:. Most civilians are not going to take up arms against a military force unless hard-pressed. Think Vichy-French. The French Underground in WW2 all had a uniform of sorts. The Geneva Convention allows for such folks as well. Anyone in their right mind that has a real cause would follow those rules just to have legitimacy for their plight. Anyone else deserves to be summarily executed...which we did not do.
 
If a country has a military force to speak of when invaded, I'd expect such a force to take arms against invaders and repel them whilst following the Geneva Convention. Failing that and assuming that the invading force is following the convention, the populace is relatively safe to flee or hunker down until the war boils over and ends. If the invading force is not following the convention, the opposing force should still try and do so. If there is no such opposing (local) force then the civilians should take what's coming to'em or form civilian militias (with uniforms)?

I'm not talking WWII...but things like the Hutu Tutsi debacle.
 
If a country has a military force to speak of when invaded, I'd expect such a force to take arms against invaders and repel them whilst following the Geneva Convention. Failing that and assuming that the invading force is following the convention, the populace is relatively safe to flee or hunker down until the war boils over and ends. If the invading force is not following the convention, the opposing force should still try and do so. If there is no such opposing (local) force then the civilians should take what's coming to'em or form civilian militias (with uniforms)?

I'm not talking WWII...but things like the Hutu Tutsi debacle.

What you describe is guerrilla warfare. A legitimate practice of war. That is not what is going on in Iraq. You have terrorists attacking the local populace and putting them in harms way for the publicity when they become collateral damage. This is what makes them illegal combatants and is the reason why I, along with the Geneva Conventions, could care less if we tied them to trees and dressed them up in colombian neck ties. You do not target non combatants if you are a legitimate fighter.
 
What you describe is guerrilla warfare..... This is what makes them illegal combatants and is the reason why I, along with the Geneva Conventions, could care less if we tied them to trees and dressed them up in colombian neck ties.

;)
 
Probably not the ones who display their thanks to the US military by giddily spitting on them, those men and women who risk their lives to provide an umbrella of safety under which the said same are happy to take shelter. :shrug:

Boy, :rolleyes: talk about biting the hand that feeds you.

Who is spitting on vets? My thing was about people (especially politicians) who have never worn the uniform, yet wave the flag and strut around to make money and get votes. Hats off to anyone who has served!
 
Who is spitting on vets? My thing was about people (especially politicians) who have never worn the uniform, yet wave the flag and strut around to make money and get votes. Hats off to anyone who has served!

Actually, I was using the word as a figure of speech, but if you would like to see some un-Americans in their finest hour, here's a not so imaginary display of actual spitting on the troops:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qw7cIOim2So&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zja97pocN8U

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwzYmUTtWL4
 
Actually there's plenty guerrilla warfare going on in Iraq. Has been for quite some time.

You don't watch the news much huh?

http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0920/p01s01-woiq.html

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6889106/

Friends of yours? Sorry, I just find it appalling and will not ever consider them honorable. No, I don't watch much news since I got rid of my TVs. When I saw Crescent News Network (CNN) reporter (I think it was Michael Wier (sp)) euologize Al Zarqawi, a filthy dirt bag that I spent months trying to kill, like he was some great freedom loving warrior, I lost all interest in what the media has to say.
 
You said that guerrilla warfare was not going on in Iraq. However, it has been going on in Iraq.

If you have chosen not to be informed that's fine and all. But why would you try to make statements as if you were informed?

What was your point in linking to the suicide bombing? Where you thinking that if there was suicide bombings there can't also be guerrilla warfare going on?

I can't seem to find this eulogy you speak of either.
 
You said that guerrilla warfare was not going on in Iraq. However, it has been going on in Iraq.

If you have chosen not to be informed that's fine and all. But why would you try to make statements as if you were informed?

What was your point in linking to the suicide bombing? Where you thinking that if there was suicide bombings there can't also be guerrilla warfare going on?

I can't seem to find this eulogy you speak of either.

Sounds like they are your kind of people. You should get together.
 
Sounds like they are your kind of people. You should get together.

to you he sounds like a terrorist, to him you sound like a nazi

and that is why nobody can get along, no one is willing to step into the others shoes.
 
Sounds like they are your kind of people. You should get together.

I simply pointed out your mistake. So how does it sound like they are my kind of people exactly?

Have you had a bunch of guerrilla fighters pointing out your factual errors? Or are you just being childish?
 
to you he sounds like a terrorist, to him you sound like a nazi

and that is why nobody can get along, no one is willing to step into the others shoes.



is
 
I simply pointed out your mistake. So how does it sound like they are my kind of people exactly?

Have you had a bunch of guerrilla fighters pointing out your factual errors? Or are you just being childish?

Seriously, Skippy. Don't you ever get dizzy?? You sound the same every time. :shrug:
 
Back
Top