War Crimes

[Cement Man]

When I joined the Armed Forces of the United States, I pretty much swore that I would kill people if needed (directly or indirectly) in the name of of my country.  I prayed that I would never have to, but was prepared to do it.  You simply have to make that decision. 

It would be rather conflicted to now invoke the Bible as needed to condemn or justify killing in war.   I believe my Christian faith has grown and deepened with my age.  My compassion for my fellow man has as well.  Still, I believe that while war is about as terrible as things can be on this earth, killing is part of it.  If the reason for war is just - no sense arguing if the killing part is or not.  War is killing.

Remember the young Nazis who got dropped off a submarine on the east coast during WWII?  They were spies that we caught and hung.  The Nazi infiltrators during the Battle of the Bulge who wore American uniforms - we shot them. As my Dad crossed France in 1944, I understand that the Nazis who surrendered in front of our troops became POW's (mostly anyway) while the ones who surrendered from behind (snipers who ran out of "supplies") just got shot. I only note that as it is a more severe form of punishment than waterboarding.  (I believe those Nazis would have overwhelmingly voted for the waterboarding, given the choice.)  I know that circumstances were different; but one circumstance was that Americans - both at home at on the front lines, had a very real sense of the evil that they were fighting.  Although not wanting to be killers or maimers it was the gruesome requirement that evil had thrust upon us. Kill some to save many. After the fact, there are plenty of folks who say we shouldn't have used "the bomb" on Hiroshima or Nagasaki.  With estimated lives lost at 1 million plus for invasion alternatives to defeat Japan, it was a horrible decision to have to make - but the right one.

I think the hands-on cold hard reality of many aspects of life is way too abstract for many Americans now days. 

I'm not sure how or if the Geneva Convention appropriately applies to terrorists who are of no particular country and wear no uniforms, or abide by ANY rules whatsoever. I really don't understand the legal justification or constitutional reasons for treating these people as citizens either.  I believe they are a special case and a reasonable system to handle them was devised and employed.  With the magnitude of pain and suffering that they can cause so easily in an open country like ours, and their proven and avowed desire to harm us (all of us, if possible) I believe it was justified.  Some were probably held in error, but collateral effects will occur in any conflict.  Balanced against the harm these people would do to us - I think the "cost" was more than justified.

[SHOOTALL]

cement man nice post .
My point with regard to the Bible seems the same .

[WylieKy]

Let's clear some things up.

1. War is war and people die.  I accept that.  In war people die, including innocents.

2. There is a difference between killing and torturing.  I kill deer on a regular basis, but I do everything in my power to prevent that deer from suffering.

3. If an enemey combatant does not honor the rules of war, that does not invalidate our obligation to do so.  (We're supposed to be the good guys.) Take that combatant, give him a war crime trial, and hang him.  How is that for cold hard reality?

[Cement Man]

Let's clear some things up.

1. War is war and people die.  I accept that.  In war people die, including innocents.

2. There is a difference between killing and torturing.  I kill deer on a regular basis, but I do everything in my power to prevent that deer from suffering.

3. If an enemey combatant does not honor the rules of war, that does not invalidate our obligation to do so.  (We're supposed to be the good guys.) Take that combatant, give him a war crime trial, and hang him.  How is that for cold hard reality?

Although I completely agree with you regarding not having an animal suffer when I kill it for food,

I'm having a real hard time following the connection between your deer hunting and waterboarding someone who might kill (you can name the number) thousands of innocent people, or is holding information that might help us prevent that from happening.

If you believe that no matter what anyone does, we are "supposed to be the good guys", I simply disagree.  That's really too vague a standard for me when some non life-threatening discomfort for a few may save many innocents. 

Just you typing on your keyboard "Take that combatant, give him a war crime trial, and hang him." isn't reality.  It's your opinion - a hypothesis, and I am grateful that you are alive and safe and that you can post it.

[SHOOTALL]

1) agreed
2)the deer is not trying to kill you ! If a bear was biting you on the azz would you wait for a humane shot or start pulling the trigger ?
3)Lets call it a police action on trerror so we can forget these rules of WAR  and start with a clean slate on how to respond and what we can do !
I agree lets clear the earth of the terrorist any way we can !

[SHOOTALL]

that was satire about Bush , right ?

[WylieKy]

I'm having a real hard time following the connection between your deer hunting and waterboarding someone who might kill (you can name the number) thousands of innocent people, or is holding information that might help us prevent that from happening.

I said that waterboarding is borderline to me.  It really causes no permanant harm unless it goes too far and the person drowns.  Once again we need to define torture.  I think of burning someone, pulling finger nails or teeth, beating or breaking bones, etc... as tortoure.

Where is the line between interogation and torture?

If a bear was biting you on the azz would you wait for a humane shot or start pulling the trigger ?

If a bear were biting me I would do everything in my power to kill it a quickly as possible.  Just like I would do everything I could to quickly kill a terrorist attacking me.  I would not take the bear and pull out it's claws in the hopes that it would tell me where it's cousins den was.

[teamnelson]

I know of no Military Officers, NCOs or Junior troops who are comfortable with torturing the enemy, and I know a few thousand directly so I am comfortable that my anecdotal evidence is accurate. Killing - no sweat, bring it on, let's do that all day. And I believe that if we were operating under the ROE of previous wars there would be far far less of the enemy to fight today ... that is a moral high ground in my mind. Detention, torture, trial and hanging is for spies and criminals - death on the battlefield is a combatant's death. As long as we treat them as a criminal group we are deluding only ourselves, which gives them advantage.

TM7, our enemy believes they started the war years before Bush became President, and that we are responding to their initiation. That is a consistent theme in the dialogue with all those we have detained. Perhaps you are referring specifically to the Battle of Iraq?

[lgm270]

I was a virulent anti-communist in the 60's, in no small part to having read of Communist treatment of our POW's captured by them in WWII,  Korea and finally in Viet Nam.   I was furious to read of their  using the following against our POW's:  waterboarding, sleep deprivation, exposure to cold, sensory deprivation, etc. 

Are those things torture?  Well our men  who experienced them thought so and so did I when I read about them.

Now I find so called "conservatives" advocating torture because "it works."  Hell yes it "works."  That's why it's always been so popular with Communists and other totalitarian regimes. I have never wavered in my belief that all prisoners should receive humane treatment. 

I became politically active by walking precincts for Barry Goldwater in Phoenix, AZ in 1964.   The Cold War was a struggle for America's national existence and neither I nor anyone else I ever heard of, felt that we needed to stoop to the level of torturing prisoners in order to defend ourselves.   

Before anyone calls me names and attacks my sanity and patriotism, be advised that if  it torturing foreign nationals is legally permitted, it is only a matter of time before the definition of "terrorist" is expanded to include American citizens  who disagree with the government and that includes most of the people on this website.   We now have an outright Communist in the White House and one of the trademarks of communist regimes is the imprisonment and torturing of "enemies of the state."   I learned this when I was a teenager and I have never forgotten it.

[powderman]

OLDSHOOTER, CEMENT MAN, SHOOTALL. Again, good posts. The only way to stop a war is to kill the enemy til he doesn't want to fight anymore. POWDERMAN. 

[kinslayer1965]

I apologize for my delay in getting back to this topic. Now where to start.......

TM7 in response to beheadings, suicide bombers and muslim extremist you offer up dime weapons and depleted uranium.

And the webb site you provided a link to was shall we say all less than convincing. If I were you I would not offer up any webb site that list Rosie Odonnell, Charlie sheen, Micheal Moore and Ms. Garafalo as proponents of your cause. Now before you go latin on me I spent the better part of four hours reading the information provided. There goes four hours of my life I will never get back. The major rumblings seem to be about explosions felt and heard many levels below the plane impact floors and a huge explosion in the basement in a "mechanical room".  Being an electrician for my entire adult life ( I am 43) the explanation seemed very plain and simple to me. Electricity, TM7, nothing more diabolical than electricity could be a very plausible explanation for your mystery explosions. Electricity is fed from the lower floors to the upper floors through conduits and buss ducts carrying voltages anywhere from your standard 120/208 & 277/480 three phase to feeder systems with voltage in the thousands of volts. Do you have any idea what kind of explosion occurs when you take well lets say a 10,000 amp service ( i used 10,000amps because it happens to be the largest service I have ever worked on personally) and lets say an airplane flies into the building and causes 10,000 amps worth of bus duct to short phase to phase. This probably happened to several subsystems at once when the plains hit the buildings. I am quite sure electrical switchgear was blowing up like crazy all over the damn building.

The link to the world order woman giving her speech was mildly interesting but ultimately I did not find it earth shattering or all that enlightening. There have been fanatics religious and otherwise as long as there has been religion or the struggle for power. Certain religions mature and evolve into less fantical forms. Some do not. We are in a war with one such religion or shall I say it is at war with us. Our powers that be in the interest of seeming PC don't want to label it as a war against the religion of Islam. I have no such reservations.

I for one wish this were a war where the articles of the Geneva Convention were applicable. I however do not believe that asking our people to abide by rules the other side has no intention of abiding by works. It is a recipee for dead men and women in uniform. Unaccceptable to me in the extreme.

I guess I am right back where I started. If it will save lives or the possibility exist that it could save lives I would have to make that call and get the information fast.

CR

[nomosendero]

CR, there you go getting logical again!!! 

[teamnelson]

To perhaps interject some levity into this thread ...

Years back I worked with some "special" folks and we got on the subject of counter-interrogation training. As part of training, they kidnapped a trainee, used all the standard sleep deprivation, bright lights, loud noises, disorientation, but he was a tough guy. So they blindfolded, stripped, duct taped him bent over a chair and lightly tapped his rear end with a rubber hose suggestively. Guy sang like a canary.

[kinslayer1965]

For anybody who is interested go to www.debunking911.com

I personally think that anyone so consumed with their hatred of George Bush that they think that he or any president would have anything to do with the murder of over 3000 of our citizens needs therapy.

Go to the webbsite it covers everything from the "superthermite" hogwash to the "never in the history of the world has fire destroyed a steel building" along with the rest of the garbage that the conspiracy people bring up. It has photos of the constuction with details of the structural framing ect, ect, ect.

I have made my living in the construction industry for my entire adult life and to this day I am still amazed that those building stayed up as long as they did. I have talked to a number of structural engineers who agree with me. The combination of the impact of several hundred thousand pounds of metal and the intense heat bought on by thousands of gallons of excellerant (jet fuel) inflicted upon structural steel with a good portion of its firesafing stripped away by the impact of the jet at over 500MPH caused the collapse of those buildings.

I am sorry if this should have been on another thread. People who want to believe that garbage make me tired.

My apologies for the rant.

CR

[no guns here]

I mean, damn, we all SAW the planes hit... THOUSANDS of eye witnesses saw the EXACT same thing that MILLIONS of TV viewers saw.  I guess the aliens planted the images in our minds.  What are the odds that HUNDREDS if not THOUSANDS of folks were involved in the biggest conspiracy of all time and NONE, NOT ONE has ever come clean?  Did the government kill them all off?  Why haven't we found the mass gravesite?  OR are the odds better that some crazy raghead with a bunch of money financed a well-planned conspiracy to take advantage of lax security to get 20 others to take over some planes and to then kill their enemy.  I mean, there is absolutely NO evidence of any suicide bombings or attacks or charges any where, any time for any reason by fanatical ideologues huh?


If it was really a conspiracy, wouldn't the water and electricity have been shut off BEFORE the impact, the better to ensure more deaths???  Why wouldn't this have been done at a time that would have ensured that more folks were killed.  I mean, hey, around 50K people worked in those two buildings right?  And they could only put together a plan that got 3K?

As for the numbers of folks thoughts on the website...

170+ Senior Military, Intelligence Service, Law Enforcement, and Government Officials  (Some more professional credit... but there are 170 + that say "this".... how many say "that")


   660+ Engineers and Architects  (Professional credit here for the most case.  Of course for every ONE that says "it was an inside job" there is ONE that says the opposite)

   190+ Pilots and Aviation Professionals  (some professional credit to these folks AND their thoughts, however, in any profession, in any county, in any age, you can find crackpots and nutcases.  Not saying that any or all of these are such at all.  Just saying that just because someone is a pilot doesn't make them an expert on why a building fell down)

   370+ Professors Question 9/11  (professors, most professors are leftist morons with nothing better to do than to poison the minds of our kids under the guise of "education".  Why do I care what they have to say?  What makes them "experts")

   230+ 9/11 Survivors and Family Members (non-professional, personal emotions.  I'd probably say stuff too if my family member had been in there)
   
200+ Artists, Entertainers, and Media Professionals (who cares about the drivel that they spew, have you paid any attention to the CRAP that is published, spoken, written and filmed by these folks?  Just because they are famous doesn't mean they have any dang clue about anything other than their own pathetic little self-absorbed life.)


 I'm SO tired of this subject.  I REALLY tired of all the conspiracy crap.  Do I think some of it is real, yeah probably a few things.  But NOT every plane flight, meeting, speech, war, battle, UFO sighting, rocket launch, new law etc is part of a grand conspiracy.




Later,
NGH

[Cement Man]

But NOT every plane flight, meeting, speech, war, battle, UFO sighting, rocket launch, new law etc is part of a grand conspiracy.
Later,
NGH

NGH, to some people even a dog wetting a fire hydrant is evidence of a grand conspiracy.  They never stop.  They never prove anything. Consider them entertainment.   

[Oldshooter]

Stump grinding folk! Raping women in front of their families/fathers, Gassing whole villages,beheading dissidents, Now that's some torture you can get your arms around! Bush was a weenie when it came to the good stuff! He didn't get nothing right. We should have impeached his behind when he stood at Ground Zero and mouthed off about finding who was responsible. The very Idea! He learned nothing from Slick Willie!

[teamnelson]

Meanwhile, I'm trying to find the Bush video wherein George is outlining the grievances against ole Sad'Dam  prior to invasion #2, wherein he eloquently (for him) and in detail list illegal torture as one of the reasons for invasion and that it was immoral and illegal in the civilized world, yadda-yadda-yadda.

..TM7

TM7, Are you saying that the charges levied against Saddam were faked, and part of the grand conspiracy? Or are you saying that it was hypocritical for Mr. Bush to list illegal torture in the charges, and meanwhile authorize waterboarding? Just want to make sure of your point.

[wareagleguy]

Churchill said this while German bombs were falling....

"The great privilege of habeas corpus, and of trial by jury, which are the supreme protection invented by the English people for ordinary individuals against the State . . . -The power of the Executive to cast a man into prison without formulating any charge known to the law and particularly to deny him the judgement of his peers-is, in the highest degree, odious and is the foundation of all totalitarian governments . . . Extraordinary powers assumed by the Executive with the consent of Parliament in emergencies should be yielded up, when and as, the emergency declines . . . This is really the test of civilisation."

[dukkillr]

Churchill said this while German bombs were falling....

"The great privilege of habeas corpus, and of trial by jury, which are the supreme protection invented by the English people for ordinary individuals against the State . . . -The power of the Executive to cast a man into prison without formulating any charge known to the law and particularly to deny him the judgement of his peers-is, in the highest degree, odious and is the foundation of all totalitarian governments . . . Extraordinary powers assumed by the Executive with the consent of Parliament in emergencies should be yielded up, when and as, the emergency declines . . . This is really the test of civilisation."

But what if we really don't like someone?  Can't we just ignore things like values and the Constitution if we think the person is really bad?

[kinslayer1965]

TM7...What was I thinking you are of course correct that webbsite is obviously part of the huge cover up....what was I thinking?       Still waiting for the answer to that yes or no question.

Cement Man......Very poor entertainment indeed. I understand your point. My problem when I hear someone spouting that nonsense I have to respond. Like the comedian I have the right to remain silent I just don't have the ability.

Oldshooter...... you are correct George has no idea what real torture is. He should have watched the videos but alas they to were probably part of some all encompassing conspiracy.

TN...Didn't you get the memo, Saddam is in Crawford Texas having shots of tequilla with W and Cindy Shehan.

Hey its a great country we live in...could you imagine what would have happened to someone who spouted that kind of nonsense lets say in the 1950s USSR?


CR

[Oldshooter]

Capturing any member of any terrorist cell or any insurgent cell that we may happen to come across is always very, very valuable, and the thing that interests me is that in most instances after a time people talk and they tell us what they know.
John Abizaid

[gypsyman]

The problem some of you are having, is that you don't understand the level of mentality of the people your dealing with. You want to go by what our idea of ''civilized'' is, or our laws,(constitution). They don't understand this level of thinking and acting. The only way to win, is to go to their level. And if that means torture, you win. Your civilized, if you come back to what you consider ''civilized''. Treating your fellow man with respect and dignity. Not cutting off a thief's hand if he was caught stealing a loaf of bread. Problem with the people in our govt. wondering if they should prosecute for ''war crimes'', they've never had to deal with people at that level. They'ld never make it. And I'm afraid their taking our country down with them. gypsyman

[wareagleguy]

I think Churchill was saying a country is judged not by the way it treats its friends but rather its enemies.  Which I agree.

Besides, if you are at war with a TRUE enemy there should be very few prisoners to torture. 

[Oldshooter]

TRUE enemy

I'm sorry, not sure how to take that! expound and elaborate!

[WylieKy]

The problem some of you are having, is that you don't understand the level of mentality of the people your dealing with.

I think that the problem is that I do understand the mentality of the people that we are dealing with, and I choose to be a better man than they.  Others, however, are ok with debasing theirselves to the level of what they formerly found to be abhorrent.  I believe that "moral degradation" is the appropiate phrase.  "If you can't beat them, join them." also comes to mind.

[Oldshooter]

How about you fellas that want  to treat the enemy combatants according to the constitution, offer up some examples of how it should have been done! Please don't say to try them in court, What I'm referring to is what do you do with them while the conflict is ongoing. Are they POWs? Are they criminals? I have yet to know of a POW tried in a civilian court ! Also they might argue that that they were merely protecting their homeland against infidels. Don'T you have to take each case on its own merits. Where they were captured, what were they doing etc.

[gypsyman]

If you chose not to go there, that is entirely up to you. The rest of us want to win this war with the least amount of causualty's on our side as possible. (quote Patton, The idea is to make the other guy die for his country first. Or something like that) gypsyman

[Cabin4]

The constituion does not apply. Due process of our Constitutional laws is not required under the Geneva Convention. They are not Americans nor are they on American soil. These prisoners should be released back on onto the battle field before they are let go in the USA.

This does however highlight a reason why we shoud not transport captives off thier native soil during the conflict. Have a jail in Iraq & Afganistan. Better yet, don't send our troops to fight to begin with.

[wareagleguy]

Oldshooter.

Sure, no problem.
Iraq = total BS and was not a TRUE enemy.  Taliban IS A TRUE ENEMY.

Get it?