Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dksuddeth
Host, while your shock, anger, frustration, and even rage may be warranted in this case, you're not a military person and I don't believe you fully understand just what the command structure entails.
This is the main person responsible. He was the highest ranking, the one in command. It is his responsibility and he failed. Do the others deserve jail time? In a civilian world, yes indeed. In the military world? apparently not, but do not be fooled by his being released. This individuals Bad Conduct Discharge will follow him the rest of his life. It's the equivalent of having a felony muder conviction on his record. He's lost the right to keep and bear arms, the right to vote, and every time he applies for a job, he's going to have that show up on his background check. This individual will never get a job that makes more than 35k a year, unless it's working for someone he knows well..
|
dksuddeth, you make a good point about my knowledge of command structure, and another in noting that the ranking member of the murderer's detail at the time of the murder, received a much harsher sentence for this crime....
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ustwo
host I think its infinitely amusing that you blame Bush directly for this.
Other than that, you weren't there, you have no clue, you have only a very short story to base your opinion on and with it you condem an entire army and the entire effort.
Bravo, nice leap.
|
Actually, no "leap" at all. It is well established in the prosecution of those who wage avoidable aggressive war, as president Bush seems to have done in Iraq:
<i>"It is against such a background that these defendants now
ask this Tribunal to say that they are not guilty of planning,
executing, or conspiring to commit this long list of crimes
and wrongs. They stand before the record of this trial as
bloodstained Gloucester stood by the body of his slain King.
He begged of the widow, as they beg of you: «Say I slew them
not.» And the Queen replied, «Then say they were not slain.
But dead they are. . . .» If you were to say of these men that
they are not guilty, it would be as true to say there has been
no war, there are no slain, there has been no crime.</i>
-Chief US Nuremberg Prosecutor Robert H. Jackson, in his closing argument at the Nuremberg trial of surviving third reich leaders
Ustwo, you have an opportunity to persuade me that Bush's invasion and occupation of Iraq was not "the supreme international crime", the "crime of aggressive war".
All you have to do is detail what portion(s) of Sec'ty of State Colin Powell's February, 2003 UN presentation, justifying military invasion of Iraq and "regime change", were accurate and rose to a level justifying the immediate threat described by Powell, Bush, cheney, and Rumsfeld, that required attacking Iraq asap. I'll point you here:
Quote:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0030205-1.html
For Immediate Release
February 5, 2003
U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell Addresses the U.N. Security Council....
....Zarqawi's activities are not confined to this small corner of north east Iraq. He traveled to Baghdad in May 2002 for medical
treatment, staying in the capital of Iraq for two months while he recuperated to fight another day....
|
Is it reasonable to believe, as you do, that it was just Bush's and Powell's "bad luck" that every significant Iraqi "threat" touted by Powell and Bush in Feb., 2003, turned out not to rise to a level justifying military invasion...WMD, mobile (trailer mounted) bio-weapons labs, Iraqi government "relations" with al-Zarqawi and al-Qaeda, or is it reasonable to believe that Bush authorized and participated in an agenda of aggressive war against Iraq?
<h3>If it is as it looks, the crime of aggressive war is the foundation and catalyst for all the crimes that followed, including the murder described in the thread's OP....</h3>
I know, I know....I'm jumping way ahead of you. I've figured out that Bush has committed the ultimate crime against humanity, and <h3>I want his still snowballing chain of crimes that are an outgrowth of his aggressive war, to stop.</h3> You think you're entitled to the luxury of denying all of the criminality that Bush has set us on a course to, but the Bush administration initiated offenses to humanity still continue, uninterrupted, and in the OP article is described but one of a number and variety too large and too horrible to fully grasp, even if one is disposed to try.
Quote:
http://www.icrc.ch/web/eng/siteeng0.nsf/html/57JQ2X
Nuremberg and Tokyo International Tribunals...
....Article 6 of the Charter of the Nuremberg International Military Tribunal established the legal basis for trying individuals accused of the following acts:
— Crimes against peace : the planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression, or a war in violation of international treaties [17], agreements or assurances, or participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the foregoing.
— War crimes : violations of the laws and customs of war. A list follows with, inter alia, murder, ill-treatment or deportation into slave labour or for any other purpose of the civilian population of or in occupied territory, murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war or persons on the seas, the killing of hostages, the plunder of public or private property, the wanton destruction of cities, towns or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.
— Crimes against humanity : murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, and other inhuman acts committed against any civilian population, before or during the war, or persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds in execution of or in connection with any crime within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, whether or not in violation of the domestic law of the country where perpetrated [18].
As far as jurisdiction ratione personae is concerned, <h3>it covered “leaders, organisers, instigators and accomplices” who had taken part in the formulation or execution of a common plan or conspiracy to commit any of those crimes:</h3> all of them were considered for “all acts performed by any persons in the execution of such plan”.
|
Quote:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...7/ai_n12564576
Saudi scholars urge Iraqis to back holy war against troops
Chicago Sun-Times, Nov 7, 2004 by DONNA ABU-NASR
BEIRUT, Lebanon -- Prominent Saudi religious scholars urged Iraqis to support militants waging holy war against the U.S.-led coalition forces as American troops prepared Saturday for a major assault on the insurgent hotbed of Fallujah.
Advertisement
The 26 Saudi scholars and preachers said in an open letter to the Iraqi people that their appeal was prompted by "the extraordinary situation through which the Iraqis are passing, which calls for unity and exchange of views." The letter was posted on the Internet.
<h3>"At no time in history has a whole people been violated . . . by propaganda that's been proved false,"</h3> Sheik Awad al-Qarni, one of the scholars, told Al-Arabiya TV.
"The U.S. forces are still destroying towns on the heads of their people and killing women and children. <h3>What's going on in Iraq is a result of the big crime of America's occupation of Iraq."</h3>
In their letter, the scholars stressed that armed attacks by militant Iraqi groups on U.S. troops and their allies in Iraq represent "legitimate" resistance.
The scholars were careful to direct their appeal to Iraqis only and stayed away from issuing a Muslim-wide call for holy war. They also identified the military as the target.
Saudi officials did not comment. AP
|