Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community  

Go Back   Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community > The Academy > Tilted Politics


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 01-03-2004, 08:34 PM   #41 (permalink)
この印篭が目に入らぬか
 
Location: College
Quote:
Originally posted by Endymon32
Um the people in guantanimo are TALIBAN, not Iraqis. The Taliban was never a legitimate government, and as such can not be covered as POW or by the geneva convention. Iraqi soldiers can be called POWs.
Hold on,

What makes a government "legitimate"? They seemed to perform the functions of a government in Afghanistan. We contacted them when we wanted to ask the rulers of Afghanistan to turn over OBL.
lordjeebus is offline  
Old 01-03-2004, 08:39 PM   #42 (permalink)
Her Jay
 
silent_jay's Avatar
 
Location: Ontario for now....
You beat me to it lordjebus, i too am curious to see ehat endymon32 considers a legit government. we're all waiting
__________________
Absence makes the heart grow fonder
silent_jay is offline  
Old 01-03-2004, 10:07 PM   #43 (permalink)
Junkie
 
In addition the people in Guatonimo did not dress as soldiers to clearly identify themselfs thus voiding the protections that the Geneva Convention would have provided by disqualiffying their PoW status.
Rekna is offline  
Old 01-03-2004, 10:49 PM   #44 (permalink)
Banned
 
Quote:
Originally posted by lordjeebus
Hold on,

What makes a government "legitimate"? They seemed to perform the functions of a government in Afghanistan. We contacted them when we wanted to ask the rulers of Afghanistan to turn over OBL.
For one, they are recognised by the governed. Second the UN recognises them. I dont think either happened. If you think that the Taliban were the legitimate government of Afganistan, then I dont know what to tell you.
Endymon32 is offline  
Old 01-03-2004, 10:57 PM   #45 (permalink)
Insane
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Rekna
In addition the people in Guatonimo did not dress as soldiers to clearly identify themselfs thus voiding the protections that the Geneva Convention would have provided by disqualiffying their PoW status.

How do you think CIA operatives who are caputred should be treated? I seriously doubt they carry out their missions in full military attire. I think there's a point where the spirit of the Convention is being ignored and details are being used to justify actions which contradict what the Convention tried to establish.


SLM3
SLM3 is offline  
Old 01-03-2004, 11:01 PM   #46 (permalink)
Her Jay
 
silent_jay's Avatar
 
Location: Ontario for now....
Quote:
Originally posted by Rekna
In addition the people in Guatonimo did not dress as soldiers to clearly identify themselfs thus voiding the protections that the Geneva Convention would have provided by disqualiffying their PoW status.
chances are if someone is pointing an AK at you there soldiers or guriellas(same thing). i too know that the CIA does not wear military attire unless it is clandestine
__________________
Absence makes the heart grow fonder
silent_jay is offline  
Old 01-04-2004, 01:46 AM   #47 (permalink)
Cherry-pickin' devil's advocate
 
Location: Los Angeles
Bringing up the CIA is a good point because its one of those cases where the line gets crossed on both sides at once...

They ain't wearing fatigues but they're from a recognized country.. how would they get treated?

And the answer to that would answer many other questions.
Zeld2.0 is offline  
Old 01-04-2004, 02:50 AM   #48 (permalink)
42, baby!
 
Dragonlich's Avatar
 
Location: The Netherlands
Quote:
Originally posted by Zeld2.0
Bringing up the CIA is a good point because its one of those cases where the line gets crossed on both sides at once...

They ain't wearing fatigues but they're from a recognized country.. how would they get treated?

And the answer to that would answer many other questions.
As always, they *could* be executed as spies. Whether they *will* be shot is another matter, up to the people that captured them.
Dragonlich is offline  
Old 01-04-2004, 06:42 AM   #49 (permalink)
Her Jay
 
silent_jay's Avatar
 
Location: Ontario for now....
Quote:
Originally posted by Zeld2.0
Bringing up the CIA is a good point because its one of those cases where the line gets crossed on both sides at once...

They ain't wearing fatigues but they're from a recognized country.. how would they get treated?

And the answer to that would answer many other questions.
not too well probably killed on the spot. for some reason countries don't like other countries spying on them.

Endymon32 the Taliban was recognized by some of those who governed.
__________________
Absence makes the heart grow fonder
silent_jay is offline  
Old 01-04-2004, 08:46 AM   #50 (permalink)
Banned
 
Silent Jay,

Yes, by other Taliban, not the other 99% of the people.
Endymon32 is offline  
Old 01-04-2004, 09:24 AM   #51 (permalink)
Her Jay
 
silent_jay's Avatar
 
Location: Ontario for now....
i'm talking other countries not afghani's.
__________________
Absence makes the heart grow fonder
silent_jay is offline  
Old 01-04-2004, 09:27 AM   #52 (permalink)
Her Jay
 
silent_jay's Avatar
 
Location: Ontario for now....
here check this out here's your government recognising the Taliban although not all of them.

http://english.pravda.ru/world/2001/10/17/18351.html
__________________
Absence makes the heart grow fonder
silent_jay is offline  
Old 01-04-2004, 09:35 AM   #53 (permalink)
Her Jay
 
silent_jay's Avatar
 
Location: Ontario for now....
the Taliban was recognised by three countries Saudi Arabia, The United Arab Emirates and Pakistan. Two of these countries are supposed to be allies of the US in the war on terror.
__________________
Absence makes the heart grow fonder
silent_jay is offline  
Old 01-04-2004, 10:10 AM   #54 (permalink)
Banned
 
Yes, and they form the world opinion....
Endymon32 is offline  
Old 01-04-2004, 10:13 AM   #55 (permalink)
Banned
 
Quote:
Originally posted by silent_jay
here check this out here's your government recognising the Taliban although not all of them.

http://english.pravda.ru/world/2001/10/17/18351.html
UM this says no such thing. First of all its talking about the government in the future. IT says that some moderates in the former taliban, MAY be included in the furture government. Sorry to burst your bubble, but a thorough reading may help your argument.
Endymon32 is offline  
Old 01-04-2004, 12:08 PM   #56 (permalink)
Her Jay
 
silent_jay's Avatar
 
Location: Ontario for now....
none the less they were still a recognized government.
Quote:
Originally posted by Endymon32
Yes, and they form the world opinion....
you only said by those that govern there was no mention of how many. How about the good ole allies Pakistan and Saudi Arabia not exactly the attitude of a friend.
__________________
Absence makes the heart grow fonder
silent_jay is offline  
Old 01-04-2004, 12:17 PM   #57 (permalink)
Pissing in the cornflakes
 
Ustwo's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally posted by silent_jay
none the less they were still a recognized government.
I thought only Pakistan had 'recognized' them.
__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.
Ustwo is offline  
Old 01-04-2004, 12:34 PM   #58 (permalink)
Her Jay
 
silent_jay's Avatar
 
Location: Ontario for now....
"Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates were the only three countries that recognized Taliban as the legitimate government in Afghanistan after the militia captured Kabul in 1996."

"Although Saudi Arabia and the UAE broke their ties with the Taliban after the Sept. 11 attacks, they have maintained their links with Taliban leaders."

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/arti...4/204400.shtml

here's where i found this information. disregard the article it is old but the information who 'recognized' the Taliban is still relevant.
__________________
Absence makes the heart grow fonder
silent_jay is offline  
Old 01-05-2004, 12:06 PM   #59 (permalink)
42, baby!
 
Dragonlich's Avatar
 
Location: The Netherlands
Three countries does not a UN make...
Dragonlich is offline  
Old 01-05-2004, 01:58 PM   #60 (permalink)
Banned
 
Three countries does not a legitimate government make...
Endymon32 is offline  
Old 01-05-2004, 04:04 PM   #61 (permalink)
Psycho
 
Location: Sweden
Isn't the discussion about the taliban being recognized as a legimate government by three outside countries a bit unnessesary. I thought you where discussing the "unlawful combatants" and that's a status only recogized by the Bush administration.
__________________
Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones. - Psalms 137:9
Nad Adam is offline  
Old 01-05-2004, 05:15 PM   #62 (permalink)
Her Jay
 
silent_jay's Avatar
 
Location: Ontario for now....
that's because bush didn't know what to do when he captured these people. all these prisoners should be treated as POW's plain and simple, does this mean that all insurgents in Iraq are going to be classified as unlawful combatants at some point. they are all POW's they were caught in a war zone fighting a war Iraq Afghanistan both wars they are POW's.

Quote:
Originally posted by Endymon32
Three countries does not a legitimate government make...
you never said how many had to recognize them only that they had to be recognized, and by apparant allies.
__________________
Absence makes the heart grow fonder
silent_jay is offline  
Old 01-05-2004, 05:29 PM   #63 (permalink)
This vexes me. I am terribly vexed.
 
Superbelt's Avatar
 
Location: Grantville, Pa
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign...ions_of_Taiwan

I guess it's time to attack Taiwan as the United States does not officially recognize their right to govern the people of China (Which is what the people we call Taiwanese call their own country) They are obviously terrorists working against their peoples will (their people being citizens of the Peoples Republic of China, at least, according the the Peoples Republic of China)
We should sit idly by as the Peoples Republic of China attacks and incorporates Taiwan into their official governing structure.
Since, you know, there is no official government there.

Taiwan is not a legitimate country because China, and more importantly the United States does not recognize them as such.

(sarcasm drips from this post)

Last edited by Superbelt; 01-05-2004 at 05:32 PM..
Superbelt is offline  
Old 01-05-2004, 05:35 PM   #64 (permalink)
This vexes me. I am terribly vexed.
 
Superbelt's Avatar
 
Location: Grantville, Pa
In fact, we label them as a "renegade authority" That sounds pretty terroristic to me.

Last edited by Superbelt; 01-05-2004 at 05:44 PM..
Superbelt is offline  
Old 01-05-2004, 05:43 PM   #65 (permalink)
Her Jay
 
silent_jay's Avatar
 
Location: Ontario for now....
another term made up by this administration
__________________
Absence makes the heart grow fonder
silent_jay is offline  
Old 01-05-2004, 07:41 PM   #66 (permalink)
Banned
 
Another Superbelt, changing the topic moment. Brought to you by Burger King, where the Burger is King. Now back to the topic at hand....
Endymon32 is offline  
Old 01-05-2004, 07:54 PM   #67 (permalink)
This vexes me. I am terribly vexed.
 
Superbelt's Avatar
 
Location: Grantville, Pa
Nah. I'm just showing how faulty your logic is when you say that certain nations aren't "valid"

Because why? Only 3 nations recognize it? Because the US has to recognize it? The UN?

The UN recognized Afghanistan. Afghanistan has been a constant member of the UN since 1946. Transition to the Taliban never changed that.
Superbelt is offline  
Old 01-05-2004, 08:06 PM   #68 (permalink)
Her Jay
 
silent_jay's Avatar
 
Location: Ontario for now....
exactly first it had to be recognized, now we fin out three countries did in fact recognize it all of a sudden Endymon32 asks they form world opinion. in your opinion does the US have to recognize a government for it to be 'valid'. Endymon32 this last question is for you.


Quote:
Originally posted by Endymon32
Another Superbelt, changing the topic moment. Brought to you by Burger King, where the Burger is King. Now back to the topic at hand....

didn't sound like he was changing the topic at all or was the fact he brought up another made up term the issue?
__________________
Absence makes the heart grow fonder
silent_jay is offline  
Old 01-05-2004, 08:08 PM   #69 (permalink)
This vexes me. I am terribly vexed.
 
Superbelt's Avatar
 
Location: Grantville, Pa
Actually "renegade authority" was coined by the UN in regards to Taiwan.
Superbelt is offline  
Old 01-05-2004, 08:24 PM   #70 (permalink)
Her Jay
 
silent_jay's Avatar
 
Location: Ontario for now....
i did not know that, you do learn something new everyday
__________________
Absence makes the heart grow fonder
silent_jay is offline  
Old 01-07-2004, 06:18 PM   #71 (permalink)
Her Jay
 
silent_jay's Avatar
 
Location: Ontario for now....
did anyone see the trophy photo that was taken of saddam shortly after his capture? i only caught a quick blirb on Global but it showed saddam and an unidentified american soldier. Is this proper under the Geneva Convention or is it the same as the videotape? i say the US is using the Geneva Convention when it suits them and all photo's or videotape should never be shown.
__________________
Absence makes the heart grow fonder
silent_jay is offline  
Old 01-07-2004, 06:55 PM   #72 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Quote:
Originally posted by silent_jay
did anyone see the trophy photo that was taken of saddam shortly after his capture? i only caught a quick blirb on Global but it showed saddam and an unidentified american soldier. Is this proper under the Geneva Convention or is it the same as the videotape? i say the US is using the Geneva Convention when it suits them and all photo's or videotape should never be shown.

It depends on if the photo was an action by the government or an action by an idividual soldier who took it upon himself. I haven't seen the photo in question which leads me to believe it was not very wiedly publisized. Just because a pows picture shows up on the news does not mean the government violated the geneva convention.... remember there are private orginzations and individuals also. If the media video taped a PoW the US would be hard pressed to stop them from publishing it since the US has a free press. The US would not be violating the convention in an instance like this. The same goes for this picture which sounds like a soldier took it upon himself to do and probably sent it home to his family who put it out for others to see. The government had nothing to do with it but I can be you the soldier is probably getting in trouble for it.
Rekna is offline  
Old 01-07-2004, 07:41 PM   #73 (permalink)
Her Jay
 
silent_jay's Avatar
 
Location: Ontario for now....
i'm still looking for the link to the photo it was shown on global news in Canada. not sure if it was a soldiers personal photo or not.
__________________
Absence makes the heart grow fonder
silent_jay is offline  
Old 01-08-2004, 05:50 AM   #74 (permalink)
Junkie
 
almostaugust's Avatar
 
Location: Oz
Quote:
Originally posted by Rekna
I find it funny people with complain about Saddam being shown for 3 seconds as a violation against the Geneva convention but then won't say a thing about the huge number of Geneva convention violations commited by Saddam and his armys in the past.

Stop being hypocritical
When Saddm was committing his most horrible crimes in 1982 and 1988 (mass gassing the Kurds), the west turned a blind eye to his crimes, and even suppoted him. I find it interesting that we are now clambering toward the moral highground about helping humanity. Im over the moon that Saddam has been caught, but lets not get historical amnesia.
almostaugust is offline  
Old 01-08-2004, 06:37 PM   #75 (permalink)
Her Jay
 
silent_jay's Avatar
 
Location: Ontario for now....
exactly the US is trying to distance itself from all saddams war crimes. if he has a public trial can you imagine the secrets that will come out.

still looking for the pic
__________________
Absence makes the heart grow fonder
silent_jay is offline  
 

Tags
convention, geneva, minutes, rumsfeld, saddam


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:29 AM.

Tilted Forum Project

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project

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 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360