ClumsyMonkey.net

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040109/ap_on_re_mi_ea/saddam_pow_5

So the Pentagon's lawyers have decided Saddam has been a war criminal since he was captured, meaning that photos and film taken of him since then have gone against the Geneva Convention.

Anyone else saddened that little will be done about this?

Tell me J-Neli.... had the US merely said that they captured Saddam and no pictures were released, would you not be the first person creating a thread saying the US was just lying in order to get supporters?

they did illeagally invade another country, kill innocent citizens, create a regime change, choose the new leaders.....sounds like criminal activity to me

Clumsyboy wrote:they did illeagally invade another country,

the resolution says otherwise.

kill innocent citizens,

unintentionally

create a regime change,

that would have never happened until the man died, only for his bastard children to take over

choose the new leaders.....sounds like criminal activity to me

new leaders that are only interim at best.

So, if someone accidentally launches a nuke from Russia and hits the US, you'll let it off as an accident?

Axtech wrote:So, if someone accidentally launches a nuke from Russia and hits the US, you'll let it off as an accident?

This is your pathetic counter-example?

pathetic? i think it's bang on. maybe the russians are hunting terrorists in america, so they use their nuke and "accidentally" level DC.

Axtech wrote:So, if someone accidentally launches a nuke from Russia and hits the US, you'll let it off as an accident?

if an investigation reveals it was an accident then yes you do. but then you begin dismantling their nuclear arms so this doesn't happen again.

doug wrote:pathetic? i think it's bang on. maybe the russians are hunting terrorists in america, so they use their nuke and "accidentally" level DC.

Ok, but first the Russians have to announce that they are going to launch a nuke at the US. Next, they tell all Americans what to do in order to avoid injury from said nuke. Finally, they have to prove how using nukes on the US is an efficient way of eliminating terrorists with minimal civilian casualties and follows the rules of engagement.

Corey wrote:Tell me J-Neli.... had the US merely said that they captured Saddam and no pictures were released, would you not be the first person creating a thread saying the US was just lying in order to get supporters?

They shouldn't have to try and gain supporters. If this was a legitimate war, then the country should be behind them, and they shouldn't need pictures to gain support.

that's right... keep back-peddling.

Bandalero wrote:

Axtech wrote:So, if someone accidentally launches a nuke from Russia and hits the US, you'll let it off as an accident?

if an investigation reveals it was an accident then yes you do. but then you begin dismantling their nuclear arms so this doesn't happen again.

Speaking of dismantling nuclear arms... why doesn't Bush make an example of himself and get rid of his own?

Besides, you avoided the point of my argument. The point is that if you kill innocents intentionally or accidentally, they're still dead. American or Iraqi, they're still dead.

Axtech wrote:

Bandalero wrote:

Axtech wrote:So, if someone accidentally launches a nuke from Russia and hits the US, you'll let it off as an accident?

if an investigation reveals it was an accident then yes you do. but then you begin dismantling their nuclear arms so this doesn't happen again.

Speaking of dismantling nuclear arms... why doesn't Bush make an example of himself and get rid of his own?

Besides, you avoided the point of my argument. The point is that if you kill innocents intentionally or accidentally, they're still dead. American or Iraqi, they're still dead.

that's a good question, why hasn't any US president gotten rid of nuclear arms? why hasn't any other country gotten rid of these arms? why doesn;t everyone get rid of their nuclear weapons and forget how to make them?

and i've quoted the question and my answer for a reason, no where does it mention the dead. i'm not avoiding any points your trying to make and in fact i'll go after your point.

to kill intentionally means for some reason beyond anyone's comprehension someone wished death on someone.

in an accident something somwhow wenr astray and did something it's not suppose to. an investigation should be launch so that we can learn from this accident and in the case of the nukes, we should dismantle or at least re-tool these weapons so that this is prevented.

United States government = war criminals

no shit

starseed_10 wrote:

United States government = war criminals

no shit

How poignant. Well, I'm convinced.