[Bananahands]

Originally Posted by RepublicanJeepr

Here's the thing, we are not fighting an army, we are fighting terrorists. They wear no uniform to distinguish themselves from civilians, they actually blend in and shield themselves with civilians. Being that they are not an army, but a group of unlawful combatants, they do not fall under the Geneva Conventions. They do not play by the rules of war and therefore should not be protected by those same rules of war.

I used to agree with this sentiment, but lately i've thought about how the English viewed the colonists when we rebelled and became our own country. Granted, the circumstances are different, but the same basic idea can be attributed. The "terrorists" don't stand out in the open saying,"here i am! let's fight!" No, they chill and kill whoever they can then go back to hiding again. It makes sense really. What would you do in their situation? I'm siding with them at all. My best friends are in Iraq right now and i'd love to go over there too, but if the American political leaders could extract their heads from their anuuuuses and form a coherent and justifiable blueprint for . . . what this country is even trying to accomplish, a mission statement, something that says,"here's what we're doing - now watch us do it. and if we don't, come get us back on track." or should we not have any representation?



all's fair in war is what i heard

[tcourdin]

Originally Posted by Kyoseki

Whether it's the fault of Bush Sr or Jr or Clinton, I really don't give a ****, I want to know what they're doing to fix it and right now I'm not convinced that either side has the first ****ing clue what they're doing.

Now see I agree with that.

its still klintons fault though

[ScotZ]

Originally Posted by Kyoseki

How do you declare war on an idea?.

You don't. You have to fight them the same way they fight you. Covertly. Like it or not you have to infiltrate and destroy from within. You have to do things that people dont like to talk about. You have to be patient. We are an instant gradification society that wants to win a war quickly or not at all. In short you have to beat them at their own game. You can not show up to play Checkers when you are in a Chess match.

Originally Posted by Kyoseki

I agree with you that it's our own fault for putting up with this crap from our government, I'm still staggered that people were more than happy to impeach Clinton for getting a blow job, but give Bush free reign to do whatever he likes.

I never really got that one either. Lieing about a BJ is morally reprehensable but Dubya takes bad advice from his people about WMD then pretty much says to the world LOOK we are againest torture but we do it . Oh well we have more planes than you so deal with it. We have no moral high ground anymore. We are not the good guys anymore, when that crap is broadcast. ( dont get me wrong we need to do some harsh things to win we simply should not be stupid enough to get caught) We live in a world of "instant news". No one can get away with anything for long before the media WILL pick up on it

[PJL]

^ I don't think we ever had the moral high ground with the possible exception of WW2, but even then in the Pacific that's questionable. We're just starting to realize the severity of our own hypocrisy.

[FreemasonJeeper]

Originally Posted by Bananahands

I used to agree with this sentiment, but lately i've thought about how the English viewed the colonists when we rebelled and became our own country.

The Brits might not have been happy with the colonists, the difference is, they were commanded be a person responsible for his subordinates, wore uniforms (fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance), and carried their arms openly. They were not terrorists, they were an organized militia that followed the customs of warfare.

[tcourdin]

Originally Posted by ScotZ

I never really got that one either. Lieing about a BJ is morally reprehensable but Dubya takes bad advice from his people about WMD then pretty much says to the world LOOK we are againest torture but we do it .

Uh because our Commander in Chief was playing "hide the pokey" for his 2 terms instead of dealing with the issues at hand! That was all he accomplished here when he was Governor was grab *** with women too. Its reprehensable and a disgrace that our children have to learn of a married man, which leads our Country, is a cheating lying husband. At least Bush has morals....and why am I in here talking politics anyway!!! You're giving me a headache.

[smoothrivers]

Originally Posted by RepublicanJeepr

War doesn't need to be declared for the Geneva Conventions to apply, but, there are certain conditions that need to be met before they do apply.

Part 1, Article 4, says:

(a) that of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;

(b) that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;

(c) that of carrying arms openly;

(d) that of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.

All of which do not apply to terrorists, therefore, they are not provided the convention's protections.

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/lawofwar/geneva03.htm

Hmmm...so I guess our Special Forces fall under the 'not covered by the Geneva Conventions? It's not a finite thing and open to pondering. But twisting the truth just so you can accuse someone of murder is pretty lowdown.

[PJL]

Originally Posted by tcourdin

At least Bush has morals

What's a bigger embarassment is that our political system was abused to impeach a guy who lied about getting a bj. That was our big global embarassment. But it wouldn't be America without a bunch of pseudo-moralists and hypocrites criticising other's personal lives.

[tcourdin]

^ Laugh it up libby

[PJL]

^ Nah, it's actually no laughing matter. Bush moral failures lead to the deaths of thousands of people; Clinton's moral failure led to a dress with a stain on it.

[tcourdin]

Originally Posted by PJL

^ Nah, it's actually no laughing matter. Bush moral failures lead to the deaths of thousands of people; Clinton's moral failure led to a dress with a stain on it.

The stains that led us to clean up the job Clinton should have been doing?


Why is it that this war is SO wrong, yet our brave men and women keep re-enlisting to go back? Seems to me they see first hand what a bunch of pansies dont?

[PJL]

Yeah, because only "pansies" think this war is a bad idea