11-21-2010, 02:58 PM
(11-20-2010, 05:00 AM)kandrathe Wrote: Um, we can the debate the reasons for the US going to Afghanistan after paramilitary (terrorists) outfitted and trained there to hijack multiple planes and fly them into assorted buildings in the US.
Are you saying that the people in Afghanistan deserve these razzias because of their role in 9/11? Someone better tell them that! (ICOS survey)
Quote:92% of respondents in the south are unaware of the events of 9/11 or that they triggered the current international presence in Afghanistan
Strange, though. Bin Laden is Saudi, and most of the 9/11 terrorists were Saudi's. Saudi-Arabia is a strong fundamentalist Islamic nation, and has a very poor human rights record. Yet, Afghanistan gets bombed for 8 years, and Saudi-Arabia is allowed to buy $60 billion worth of militairy equipment. (article).
(11-20-2010, 05:00 AM)kandrathe Wrote: No. I recall he did not.
Since you can answer for him, let me ask you this: if the 'unlawful combatant' status of Gitmo prisoners is not his legal ground to keep them there, what would it be?
(11-20-2010, 05:15 AM)MEAT Wrote: the point is he used weapons in an attempt to kill (this is not to be taken lightly) against the army which captured him.
Is that a crime, if you are not wearing a uniform? Against what law exactly? In which country? I read somewhere that in the USA it's actually proper 'code of conduct' to kill in order to defend against arrests by foreigners (even if those are backed by international law), or against those that threaten to change your way of life.
(05-08-2009, 10:03 PM)Occhidiangela Wrote: Hey, stupid, I said I'd kill to protect my way of life. Kill. Got it? I even agreed to abide by the Code of Conduct, which means I would give my life, and kill, for our way of life.
(05-19-2009, 01:43 AM)Occhidiangela Wrote: Next, when you cite international law, by all means, come into my country and try to arrest my people. I'll shoot to kill, be it Obama you are after or Cheney.