Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Frazzled wrote:

isthatmycow wrote:I didn't say kill them, i said remove. you can remove someone from power without killing them. Hell, you can do it without war.

Really? how is that again?

Ghandi did it, i think.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Not if they are attacking us.

Its like I'm trying to debate with a skipping record. I give up.

PLease do.

Frazzled wrote:
America only has a duty to make sure the rights of US CITIZENS aren't stepped on. We have no duty to anyone else.

So you're saying that we can freely imprison people here on Visas?

dogma wrote:

Frazzled wrote:
America only has a duty to make sure the rights of US CITIZENS aren't stepped on. We have no duty to anyone else.

So you're saying that we can freely imprison people here on Visas?

Naw, Visa cardholders are okay. I hold a Visa.

Them damned American Express yuppies have to go though.

isthatmycow wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

isthatmycow wrote:I didn't say kill them, i said remove. you can remove someone from power without killing them. Hell, you can do it without war.

Really? how is that again?

Ghandi did it, i think.

Ghandi? How'd it work for Hitler. How about those guys running Sudan? How about the Taliban? How about Cousescu, Pol Pot, Samosa on and on and on and on.

Frazz, I think you and I missed the memo stating that terrorists who blow up buildings over here and crash planes into skyscrapers have the same rights that you and I do.

Yeah, it's called the magna carta and U.S. law. Things you both seem to have never heard about. Heres an idea, how about you both move to south korea. You would love it there, and it seems to be the perfect fit for your kind of governance and justice.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Frazz, I think you and I missed the memo stating that terrorists who blow up buildings over here and crash planes into skyscrapers have the same rights that you and I do.

Yeah, it's called the magna carta and U.S. law. Things you both seem to have never heard about. Heres an idea, how about you both move to south korea. You would love it there, and it seems to be the perfect fit for your kind of governance and justice.

But then you would miss me Shuma

Frazzled wrote:
...How about those guys running Sudan?...How about the Taliban?...

Most of the Taliban switched their allegiance to the Northern Alliance when placed under pressure. The Sudanese government is using aggressive counter-terrorist action to stop a group that uses deplorable tactics; becoming equally deplorable in the process.

Frazzled wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Frazz, I think you and I missed the memo stating that terrorists who blow up buildings over here and crash planes into skyscrapers have the same rights that you and I do.

Yeah, it's called the magna carta and U.S. law. Things you both seem to have never heard about. Heres an idea, how about you both move to south korea. You would love it there, and it seems to be the perfect fit for your kind of governance and justice.

But then you would miss me Shuma

Nah, I'm sure I would see you all the time on TV after you were picked up by government forces for terrorism and spying, and then tortured and imprisoned without trial for an indefinite period of time. The U.S. hates it when countries do that after all.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Frazz, I think you and I missed the memo stating that terrorists who blow up buildings over here and crash planes into skyscrapers have the same rights that you and I do.

Yeah, it's called the magna carta and U.S. law. Things you both seem to have never heard about. Heres an idea, how about you both move to south korea. You would love it there, and it seems to be the perfect fit for your kind of governance and justice.

But then you would miss me Shuma

Nah, I'm sure I would see you all the time on TV after you were picked up by government forces for terrorism and spying, and then tortured and imprisoned without trial for an indefinite period of time. The U.S. hates it when countries do that after all.

Dude I work for a living, am married with a teenager only a year or two younger than you. You act like I would even notice.

How about YOU leave Shuma?

I'll even buy you the one way ticket out of here.

As we all know the 9/11 hijackers and the Detroit underwear bomber weren't ON US soil; they were up in the air when they did what they did so by RAW the Magna Carta and the Constitution don't apply to them.

I just wish the US would "nut up" and not dick around at Gitmo. If these are bad people, follow the UCMJ and shoot them. If not, let them go.

How about YOU leave Shuma?

Why? I'm the one espousing the American ideals of freedom, justice, the rule of law, and the rights of man here.

I'll even buy you the one way ticket out of here.

I thought you were out of money?

As we all know the 9/11 hijackers and the Detroit underwear bomber weren't ON US soil; they were up in the air when they did what they did so by RAW the Magna Carta and the Constitution don't apply to them.

I'm pretty sure the magna carta doesn't have elevation restrictions written in it.

It could be said that the MC could be permissive; if it was meant to apply to land, sea and air it would say so. It only applies to people on US soil. Soil =/= sea or air.

To get you out of the US I'd come up with the money. Granted you'd fly in the cheap seats but whatever.

Ah yes, rights of others at the expense of the safety of our own. Great thinking that is. The freedom of terrorists at the expense of our national security.

Yeah, you espouse American ideal greatly Shuma.

ShumaGorath wrote:

How about YOU leave Shuma?

Why? I'm the one espousing the American ideals of freedom, justice, the rule of law, and the rights of man here.

Really? Agree with me or leave?

Frazzled wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

How about YOU leave Shuma?

Why? I'm the one espousing the American ideals of freedom, justice, the rule of law, and the rights of man here.

Really? Agree with me or leave?

It was a friendly suggestion, I just thought you would be a lot happier there.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ah yes, rights of others at the expense of the safety of our own. Great thinking that is. The freedom of terrorists at the expense of our national security.

Not terrorists until proven guilty.

Yeah, you espouse American ideal greatly Shuma.

And you espouse Soviet Ideals even better.

Fateweaver wrote:
As we all know the 9/11 hijackers and the Detroit underwear bomber weren't ON US soil; they were up in the air when they did what they did...

US airspace is US soil. Even if it weren't, the underwear bomber did eventually land to be apprehended.

The 9/11 plotters that we arrested were not in the air at any time.

JohnHwangDD wrote:I just wish the US would "nut up" and not dick around at Gitmo. If these are bad people, follow the UCMJ and shoot them. If not, let them go.

That's about how I feel. Set a policy, and follow it.

Wha?

So the underwear bomber is not a terrorist until proven by courts he is guilty? What of the many people on the plane who witnessed it? What about the guy who confronted him and got him down until the plane landed and Feds arrived?

That's proof enough. It doesn't NEED a court to prove he is.

I'm confused Shuma. It seems to me you are in favor of civilian over military courts but you seem to think the outcome will be the same. If you feel that way then why not just let them be tried in front of the military tribunal?




Automatically Appended Next Post:

dogma wrote:

Fateweaver wrote:
As we all know the 9/11 hijackers and the Detroit underwear bomber weren't ON US soil; they were up in the air when they did what they did...

US airspace is US soil. Even if it weren't, the underwear bomber did eventually land to be apprehended.

The 9/11 plotters that we arrested were not in the air at any time.

JohnHwangDD wrote:I just wish the US would "nut up" and not dick around at Gitmo. If these are bad people, follow the UCMJ and shoot them. If not, let them go.

That's about how I feel. Set a policy, and follow it.

RAI that is true; RAW does only mention US soil. Soil =/= sea or air. I'm no biologist but I'm pretty sure dirt is not the same as water or air.

So the underwear bomber is not a terrorist until proven by courts he is guilty? What of the many people on the plane who witnessed it? What about the guy who confronted him and got him down until the plane landed and Feds arrived?

That makes it an open and shut case.

That's proof enough. It doesn't NEED a court to prove he is.

It really does though according to our laws. The ones you seem to want violated for a reason you have yet to state.

I'm confused Shuma.

Stop the presses.

It seems to me you are in favor of civilian over military courts but you seem to think the outcome will be the same. If you feel that way then why not just let them be tried in front of the military tribunal?

I don't believe that they are enemy combatants, I believe that they are foreign criminals. Military tribunals are secretive and highly inefficient when handling non military matters, as their record at guantanamo shows. Were the military tribunals more transparent and effective I wouldn't really mind, considering they aren't U.S. citizens, but they aren't and given the considerable lack of transparency, the presence of repeated uses of torture on innocent civilians, and the clear lack of respect for human rights and international law I simply don't trust them enough to represent America in that way.

RAI that is true; RAW does only mention US soil. Soil =/= sea or air. I'm no biologist but I'm pretty sure dirt is not the same as water or air.

Or pavement, tiling, or carpet. A majority of crimes are not commited in grassy fields.

America imposed the rights of men who weren't trying to kill the innocent.

We have a jail in america where the prisoners live in tents outside and wear pink undergarments while the detainees we have live in a prison comparable to other american prisons. How come they can't live in tents outside either?

In my books a terrorist is a person who denounces allegiance to their own country and therefor doesn't deserve Geneva Convention treatment.

As to some of those people being found innocent and released are actual terrorists who later return to terrorism.

As to some of those people being found innocent and released are actual terrorists who later return to terrorism.

And most aren't. Which is more valuable, holding one true radical terrorist or unlawfully imprisoning five civilians away from their families indefinitely.

Fateweaver wrote:
So the underwear bomber is not a terrorist until proven by courts he is guilty? What of the many people on the plane who witnessed it? What about the guy who confronted him and got him down until the plane landed and Feds arrived?

That's proof enough. It doesn't NEED a court to prove he is.

Under US law it goes to court, regardless of witnesses.

Fateweaver wrote:
I'm confused Shuma. It seems to me you are in favor of civilian over military courts but you seem to think the outcome will be the same. If you feel that way then why not just let them be tried in front of the military tribunal?

Because, in this instance, its against the law. You don't get to apply the law selectively. Not without legal stipulations to the contrary.

Fateweaver wrote:
RAI that is true; RAW does only mention US soil. Soil =/= sea or air. I'm no biologist but I'm pretty sure dirt is not the same as water or air.

Legally US soil is simply treated as US territory; including airspace and territorial waters. Its not a rules as intended argument, its an argument from jurisprudence. A very sensible one as the founders would have had no understanding of either territorial waters, or airspace.

Pfft. Kill them all and let God sort them out.

halonachos wrote:
In my books a terrorist is a person who denounces allegiance to their own country and therefor doesn't deserve Geneva Convention treatment.

Geneva Conventions also cover non-international conflicts, though not in full. One of the few prohibitions presented in Common Article 3 is against murder, and another is against torture.

Fateweaver wrote:How about YOU leave Shuma?

I'll even buy you the one way ticket out of here.

As we all know the 9/11 hijackers and the Detroit underwear bomber weren't ON US soil; they were up in the air when they did what they did so by RAW the Magna Carta and the Constitution don't apply to them.

The law of the country where the airline is based obtains on airliners in the air, except where it is outranked by international law. Same with ships.

I loved the part where Fateweaver said the Magna Carta only applies on US soil. He has never made more clear that he literally has no idea what he's talking about.

He's never read a book about our government or legal system. He paid no attention in school. He can't even be bothered to check wikipedia. He just listens to Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin and watches Fox News and lets those ideas percolate in his head and defecate out of his mouth and onto this board via his keyboard.

Here he is:
http://www.theonion.com/content/opinion/yee_haw_my_vote_cancels_out

Fraz, really, this is the side you're on. This is whose opinion you're advocating. Don't you sense that something is wrong?

Oh my Lord Mann, it's even sadder that you and others take me seriously about my RAW vs RAI of where the Magna Carta applies.

I figured people could figure out the sarcasm for themselves when I started mentioning the RAW vs RAI of "on US soil".

Got to love how mods attack people. Nice on Mann. If I made that exact same post toward another poster I'd get a warning. Perhaps you should warn yourself?

I don't listen to Rush or Sarah and I don't watch the news. Not to mention Liberals LOVE to watch NBC and the Daily Show 'cuz you know they is right about them damn foreigners being treated unfairly and we should treat them as well as we do our own citizens.

I paid attention in History class but only when it pertained to the US kicking ass (like the Revo war, WW1 and WW2) and not to feel good bs like "we need to treat foreigners with dignity and respect even when they try to kill US citizens".

Everyone does realize the Magna Carta is utterly irrelevant and has no standing at all in the US right?

Frazzled wrote:Everyone does realize the Magna Carta is utterly irrelevant and has no standing at all in the US right?

Shhhhhh. They'll hear you.

Fateweaver wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Everyone does realize the Magna Carta is utterly irrelevant and has no standing at all in the US right?

Shhhhhh. They'll hear you.

Oh come now, we all know that you're just finding that out now.