View Single Post
Old 10-16-2009, 12:02 PM   #2 (permalink)
The_Dunedan
Junkie
 
Quote:
how is it that war crimes can be committed, understood as crimes against humanity, yet not be prosecuted?
Collectivism. If enough people (or enough of the RIGHT people) decide that something isn't a crime, wasn't a crime, or simply didn't happen, then it isn't, wasn't, or didn't. Political consensus, in the sense of realpolitik, is all that's required.

Quote:
shouldn't there at least be investigations undertaken in order to determine the accuracy of this report?
Absolutely, as soon as possible.

Quote:
and if the report is in fact accurate--or even if it is only partially accurate---wouldn't you think it important that this be carried out?
Without doubt.

Quote:
what exactly does the idea of war crimes mean if the only context in which anyone is prosecuted for them is after a country looses a war?
That, as always, the winners get to write history books and take credit for their glories; the losers get to read the books (if they survive) and are punished for their transgressions.

Quote:
i find this disturbing.
what do you think?
I think you an I have found something to agree upon.
The_Dunedan is offline  
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73