Boo Radley
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2009
- Messages
- 37,066
- Reaction score
- 7,028
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
If your edit was accurate, then why the 14th amendment?
Clarification. In the begining they we speaking mostly of white land holders, but not divided by citizenship (I was a poli Sci maor for awhile).
If your edit was accurate, then why the 14th amendment?
If there isn't a definitive difference between righteous killing and murder/assassination, why does the military have Rules of Engagement for enemy combatants?
You may want to check on a refund.... The USC applies to US citizens and those within it's jurisdiction.
To make soldiers lives harder, duh.
We don't have the option of ignoring rule of law just because the person we're dealing with isn't a citizen.
What I quoted was the Declaration of Independence. It states our beliefs. We don't have the option of ignoring rule of law just because the person we're dealing with isn't a citizen.
There were speaking about all of mankind, specifically all white male landholders. The language was specifically added by more liberal elements as I understand it (class was some years ago). Later this language was used as an argument to free slaves and include women. At no time have ai seen any evidence they meant only citizens.
However, I look at it differently than you do. I don't see those individuals at all. I see us as being subject to the rules. We, our people, soliders are subject to the laws and prinicples no matter who we're addressing because we are citizens. It informs us on how to behave. It's not only rights afforded, but rules of behavior.
And your poor nation esteem stuff is tiresome. By believing it our ideals in no way suggests I hate my nation. Quite the opposite. I believe in it's ideals and values. I merely want us to live up to them and not down to those ideals I see as less noble, those of the people we fight.
Well, you are intentionally misinterpeting what I am saying here, so at this time I'll leave it, and hit the pool.
j-mac
I merely want us to live up to them and not down to those ideals I see as less noble, those of the people we fight.
while Bin Ladens death was significant to people in the western world it wasn't as significant to the people in the ME. he lost his relevancy a long time ago. millions of muslim Arabs don't give a **** about Bin Laden, they are more interested in mass uprising to get rid of dictators. recent events are testament to that.On another note.....
Have you noticed that since this happened, it's like Japan's nuclear crisis never happened?
In three months, no one will care about bin Laden either.
People's attention spans are so short these days.
while Bin Ladens death was significant to people in the western world it wasn't as significant to the people in the ME. he lost his relevancy a long time ago. millions of muslim Arabs don't give a **** about Bin Laden, they are more interested in mass uprising to get rid of dictators. recent events are testament to that.
he's dead. good riddance. there's a lot more important things going on in the world than spending months talking about a man who had become irrelevant being killed in Pakistan.
What I quoted was the Declaration of Independence. It states our beliefs. We don't have the option of ignoring rule of law just because the person we're dealing with isn't a citizen.
The "declaration of independence" is not law. sorry.
Didn't say it was. Read for comprhension. It'll help. :coffeepap
The Boo Radley shuffle. :lol:
Rev, this is your tactic when you misread something, or find yourself wrong. I accept your confession. :coffeepap
no dood, it's the tactic you use to deflect when you make an error. We were talking laws, you invoked the DoI, if you didn't mean to apply it to the conversation as evidence for your position, you shouldn't have referenced it.
Back to some thoughts here.
OBL=murder?
Seal team 6=murderers?
yes or no?
I didn't make an error, you did.
The comment was to j, and it was about our ideals and not the law. That you can't follow is not my problem.
And I've stated clearly, ask any who can read, that the SEALS are soldiers following the orders of a superior. As long as they followed those in good faith, they are not guilty of any crime IMHO.
However, if the president ordered the assassination of a political leader (OBL the leader of al Quaeda, a political group), he broke the law. If OBL was not a political leader, then this was the killing of a person (Assassination by definition requires he be a political leader). That seems like murder to me if not done in a cmbat situation of some type. Excuting a person without some rule of law is a problem for me. I would think it would be a problem for most.
AQ is a terror group, not some political entity.
j-mac
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?