Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei
What happened to the Shiite's in the southern marshlands when they tried to revolt?
|
Of course, Saddam's regime was bad. I'm not arguing it was good by any means, but I am saying that his "evil" is shown to be much greater than it really is.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei
Evil is complacency in the face of evil. 25 million people are now free in Iraq because we took action, Saddam will no longer be able to indiscriminantly kill them again. Likewise, 28 million people are free in Afghanistan who were living under a repressive and illegitimate regime. No more public stonings for not wearing a burka or women trying to read at olympic stadium. More good has come out of our taking action in Iraq then the complacency of the world, which admittedly the US was apart of, for the last 13-14 years.
|
What did you do to sop Saddam? Probably noting. Does that make you evil? Nope. It wasen't your responsibility to stop Saddam. You would run some terrible risks if you had tried to stop Saddam. We ran terrible risks trying to remove Saddam. Those risks included the loss of a lot of our own soldiers (what is the death toll at now for American soldiers?), the heavy loss of Iraqi citizens, and the international community condeming us for our cowboy diplomacy. We clearly did not consider these to be great consequences as we went in. There was a better way to do this.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei
Wrong. Illegal combatants aren't afforded the rights of citizenship, they are forfeited. If you read the 14th amendment foreign citizens in our custody are afforded the same protection as American citizens. And you are right, enemy combatants are subject to Napoleanic law, that's because they aren't in custody of civil authority.
|
You're response agrees with mine. I'm not sure why you said "Wrong". The logic still applies. An American citizen charged with a crime is innocent until proven guilty. If guilt cannot be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, the person is considered legally innocent. The same is not true of those in Guantanimo Bay. The burden of proof is not on the state if it cannot prove guilt, yet it still convicts the person.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei
So you're comparing the unforuante instances of collateral damage and the extremely rare cases of soldier abuse, which has gone punished, to the holocaust? Nice.
|
First, I was not comparing the abuse alone to the holocaust. I was comparing the lives of every Iraqi killed by an American bomb in the last 20 years,
and the soldier abuse,
and the restructuting that will eventually cost the Iraqis their econemy. And it's not by any means nice.