Army Guy

States are self recognized. Read a little bit about what a state is, what is required to be a state and get back. Fact is people don't like recognizing new states. If I am self recognized as state XYZ and you don't like state XYZ you can say I don't recognize that state, but the fact is, it is a state because it is self recognized, and it is only politics stopping the second point of statehood, a willingness to communicate. A state can possess the willingness to communicate and thus be a state, but others not willing to communicate limits the external recognition of that state. You just see only real countries are states, false. Only totalitarian governments won't let the world be free and force conformity. The state of Afghan already existed and was created in 1709 , By Mirwais Hotak declares Afghanistan (land of the Afghans) an independent state and establishes the Hotaki dynasty at Kandahar.....so there was no need to recognize the state itself, as it had already existed...... What i was reffing to was the offical recoginition of the government itself, And just like the Taliban when it formed the Afghani Government in September 1996, government officials of the Islamic State of Afghanistan under Burhanuddin Rabbani were displaced by forces of the Taliban. The United Nations refused to recognize the Taliban government, instead it recognized the Islamic State as the official government government in exile. The Organisation of the Islamic Conference left the Afghan seat vacant until the question of legitimacy could be resolved through negotiations among the warring factions. The Taliban controlled 95% of the territory by 2001 and only Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates recognized them as the government of Afghanistan. The remaining 5% belonged to rebel forces that became known as the Northern Alliance. Which creates a problem does it not, 3 nations out of the entire UN refused to recognize the Taliban as the offical government of Afghanistan....But rather recognized the Burhanuddin Rabbani has the government in exile....The same situation as you proclaim the Taliban are in today the government in exile.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Afghanistan I know you don't like wiki, but this info is basic and available on hundreds of others.... And yet according to you this works for only the Taliban....But lets also make some other connections that you have pinned on the current government ....You've mentioned and not yet "proved" CIA involvement in the creation of the current government....And yet failed to mention the huge role Pakistan and their ISI played in sustaining the taliban government with not only funding, equipment and supplies, direct military assistance, planning , and providing manpower ....these roles were reported by Human rights watch, and many other sources....You see the Taliban were not elected by the people of Aghanistan, but rather siezed power via force....which i assume you think is alright, but god forbid you have some election irregularities.... http://www.hrw.org/reports/2001/afghan2/Afghan0701-02.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban So i want to take us back to the beginning of the current governments history....in December 2001, the German city of Bonn hosted a conference of Afghan leaders at Hotel Petersberg, to choose the leader of an Afghan Interim Authority – widely known as the Bonn Conference.[1] The Conference chose Hamid Karzai, who was subsequently elected President in 2004. I checked the names mentioned in the link below, and none of them were working for the CIA at the time, nor was there any CIA members at the conference at the time....Instead Afghanis politicians who got together and decided who would assume the role of interm leader....that deligation choose Hamid Karzai, as the best canidate....All this was done under UN auspices ..... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Conference_on_Afghanistan,_Bonn_(2001) In December 2001, a number of prominent Afghans met under UN auspices in Bonn, Germany, to decide on a plan for governing the country; as a result, the Afghan Interim Authority (AIA) - made up of 30 members, headed by a chairman - was inaugurated on 22 December 2001 with a six-month mandate to be followed by a two-year Transitional Authority (TA), after which elections are to be held. One of the sections of the Bonn Agreement[1] envisaged the establishment of the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force.[2] Resolution 1386 of the United Nations Security Council subsequently established ISAF. Before the election of 2004, Karzai led the country after being chosen by delegates of the Bonn Conference in December 2001 to head an interim government after the removal of the Taliban Emirate. Just wanted to put this in here again, note it says that the Taliban Emirate had been removed, and replaced by a new government.....under the UN so i guess this links them to this conspiracy theory of yours as well... This is followed by a Transitional Administration which was to serve for a 2 year period.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghan_Transitional_Administration This all goes to prove that your orginal statement that Omar was acting in self defence is false, just not possiable.... ....that the government of Afghan at that time was in fact the only legal version, there was no taliban in waiting or excile they had been removed from power and done so under the watchful eye of the UN themselfs.... with the new government formed under the same watchful eye of the UN..... So with the government of Hamid Karzai up and running , Omar could not have been acting in self defense as the Taliban were removed.....and a new government put in place.....one that had decreed that terroist groups and insurgent fighters such as the Taliban were not to be tolerated, and had asked ISAF for assistance in assisting with gain control of the security of the nation..... In english that means Omar and his good buddies were fugitives from the law....and were being hunted down for thier activities....which included terrorizing the people of Afghanistan....now it is kind of hard to get a self defence judgement on that....and if one was granted, then all fugitives could claim the same thing and gun down government forces as they seemed fit.....

au contraire, It is incredibly easy to debate a topic when the person you're debating knows nothing about it. The taliban existed before 1996, and they continue to exist. You can't extinguish states, their scope of influence however can change. Hamid is a US puppet, always has, hasn't had a legitimate election yet. How old are you ? your reading comprehension is well below a 5 th grader.....my son knows more about this topic than you do and he is in grade 6.... Show me where i said that the taliban did not exist before 1996....and while they continue to exist , in your mind what do they control, what government do they form.....and while they continue to combat ISAF and Afghanis governmental forces in Afghanistan they form no party that has any legal rights any where... Your right the state of Aghanistan still exists but it is controled by the elected government of Afghanistan....it's head of state is Hamid Karzi....perhaps you can provide a source that states something else....maybe the 100,000 topics in goggle are wrong....Yes the Taliban do have influence over Afghanistan they also have influence on Pakistan , shit to some degree Canada but that does not mean they are in charge., or form the government of those states..... As for the the election claim....again provide a source that states so, because your just pulling these facts out your ass....Show us where this election or any of the process was not legitimate..... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamid_Karzai WRONG - it was ISAF that invited Hamid Karzai to stay and assist with gaining control over the country. Please provide a source,..... Not even sure what your piont is with the rest of your post, maybe one day you'll explain it to.....

I've said dozens of times i do not agree with everything that has happened to Omar, as it has been stated in the media his re education will commence very soon under the Canadian system. And while his situation was not all of his making "HE" has made some bad choices along this journey as well, those are the ones i would like to see him held accountable....

Thats bullshit and you know it, first the government can not agree to anything that would be illegal, meaning if this trail or court was not legal, there findings would mean jack shit here in this country....and Omar would have been returned back to Canada ASAP to face some sort of trail here.....Not to mention Omars defence team would have been all over that...instead today Omar sits in a federal jail house sitting out the rest of his term....And the SC Sits and does nothing....while a canadian citizen serves time in our penal system....i don't think so....A Canadian citizen can not do time because it was decided by the executive's prerogative to do so.....The whole process needs to be done in a legal court of law....get over it...or perhaps you can provide a source that spells it all out for those of us with piont guns at people all day........if it is not to much problem for a guy that just fishes all day...oh and lets not forget whine about omar as a hobby...maybe you can put up or STFU...

Both you and eyeball keep saying the same thing, but why has the SC not struck down this whole court case and grant young mr Omar a free pass....Why becuase the court in which he is convicted in is "legal" and it's findings are legal, or young mr Omar would not being doing time in a federal prison would he.....International law does define him as a child soldier, but the same law does not prevent him or any child from being held accountable for his crimes.... But some how you two refuse to accept that fact....or do we need to post those laws back up here for you to read another time.

Actually the Canadian navy is the only foreign navy to be a part of a US Naval battle group, just something to think about....

The reason is legal, it's spell out very clearly in the conventions, inter national law, and you guessed it Canadian law.....He is a terrorist, illegal combatant, an insurgent....he always will be nothing more according to the law....

I agree. I dont think this guy did anything wrong at all. And as a POW you are right that he should be held until the war is over. The only problem I see is that the GWOT is not actually a war its a racket. It will go on until the people being tricked into funding it wise up, and that could be many decades. Why then was he held as an insurgent and not as a POW....Was he classified as a soldier....NOPE why is that what is the legal reason......

The Taliban (Pashto: طالبان‎), alternative spelling Taleban,[5] (ṭālibān, meaning "students" in Pashto) is an Islamic fundamentalist militant movement of Pashtun tribesmen.[6] It ruled large parts of Afghanistan and its capital, Kabul, as the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan from September 1996 until October 2001. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban It's extremily hard to debate a topic when the person your debating knows nothing about it. So i'll spell it out for you....Taliban took over power on Sept 1996....and was removed from power on Oct 2001.....by Coalition forces......following so far....after which in Dec 2001 Hamid Karzi is chosen by Prominent Afghan political figures to serve a 6 mth term as Chairman of the interm admin, then he was chosen as imterm President during the 2002 Grand assembly.....after this term he is elected as President by the Afghan people.....I gave you all the links below should be easy enough to follow....during this time the Taliban do no have any control over the government...... Hamid Karzai, GCMG (Pashto: حامد کرزی‎, Hāmid Karzay; born 24 December 1957) is the 12th and current President of Afghanistan, taking office on 7 December 2004. He became a dominant political figure after the removal of the Taliban regime in late 2001.[1] During the December 2001 International Conference on Afghanistan in Germany, Karzai was selected by prominent Afghan political figures to serve a six month term as Chairman of the Interim Administration.[2] He was then chosen for a two year term as Interim President during the 2002 loya jirga (grand assembly) that was held in Kabul, Afghanistan. After the 2004 presidential election, Karzai was declared winner and became President of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. He won a second five-year-term in the disputed 2009 presidential election.[ The US and ISAF were not under Afghan command...... Your right but that was not what i said i said they were operating under the Authority of the Afghan government it was the AFghan government that invited ISAF to stay and assist with gaining control over the country, and to deal with the insurgents......I hope that is clear enough.... The US invasion. You are looking at it from a side, you fail. ..... AT this piont in time the US invasion is done , and has moved into a 2 part mission one with the US driving and one with ISAF driving.....it's changed from invasion to assistance.....SO once again i'll ask what invasion, ISAF was asked by the Afghan government to assist hard to invade when the countries government ask for your help..... So now Omar is a terrorist operating illigally in a country that does not want his assistance.....making him an insurgent....one that is being hunted by the Afghan government and ISAF......so with all that what gives Omar and his merry band the right to answer the door with automatic gun fire...and how is that self defense....and does that give criminal in Canada the right to greet cops at the door with gun fire and could they claim self defense.... ......that's very selective, the taliban government were fighting an illegal invasion I wasn't aware the USA gets to decide who was the government of afghanistan...apparently the justice/laws/rules of war are whatever the USA decides they should be, which is essentially is the same as having no rules, laws or justice... If you read all the above links it should come clear to you who was in power , and when they took power....

After what almost 900 pages on this subject and we have to go over it again. Note the Date July 27, 2002, and the WHY looking for a Bomb maker The WHY they went over to the hut that Omar was in.... Under WHAT grounds and WHO's Authority, Hamid Karzi's authority, he was acting as interm President during the 2002 loya jirga (grand assembly) that was held in Kabul, Afghanistan.(goggle Hamid Karzi) The Afghanis miltia men were aslo acting under that Authority, Afganis Policemen, Sorry my bad Afghanis Milita men....now the less under the Authority of the the NOW government of Afghanistan. As for what law was broken, Do we really have to go through all that, I will bring up the anti terrorism act at the time, along with anti terror laws under Inter national law....of course there is the genva convention in regards to terrorism, not counting the Afghan law on this subject........you can do your own research as it has already been done in the almost thousand pages related to this topic... The Taliban had already been taken down by this date....nice try No they are not , but they were acting on the authority of the Afghan government..... No he was not, He was a Canadian citizen, As for his defence again'st a foreign invasion....what invasion, at the time ISAF and NATO were fighting along side of the Afghan government on thier request....check your time line i9t seems to be way off....so according to the government of Afghanistan at the time the Taliban and AL Quiada were classified as Insurgents....Got to hate when that happens....So what inter national law protects terrorist again ?...

Who has better training, the terrorists kids or the ones that grow up to kill them? same ---- different pile. What a load of Crap, when was the last time you saw children getting training on fully automatic wpns, RPG's, explosives, learning how to assualt objectives....a couple shoots at the range does not equal the training these guys get, and playing cowboys and indians will never even come close to the training these guys get....It's not the same pile.... Another load of crap, self defense, tell me what part of self defense was it when the 3 Afghanis policemen knocked on the door and were greeted by a hail of gun fire..... Omar was a Canadian citizen in a foreign country, and was subjected to their laws,( which does not include greeting policemen with gunfire) ...he was also a part of and a member of a terrorist group, sorry strike 2, He was part of a bomb making cell, strike 3 perhaps you can give all us readers a few laws that clearly state Omar is acting within the law.....And was entitled to self defense. While i don't agree with everything that Omar has been faced with during his life time, he has been convicted in a court of law of murder for crimes he committed and is now doing the time for those crimes as justice demands, his circumstances and age have played a part in his sentencing, orginally 40 years parred down to just 8........I shed no tears for the family he has lost, nor the pain he has suffered, I've watched to many of my own comrads, loaded on to the back of a herc to make the long journey home in an aluminum casket,or on a bed missing limbs and scarrd for life....for me he will always be the enemy. An enemy which was designated by our Government, and Omars actions... No it would still be murder has Omar had no legal right to bear arms and use them in combat. Another load of crap....Maybe you can back up this garbage with a source....maybe you can find a source that gives Omar authority to take part in a conflict in a foreign nation, because you make it sound like it is OK to join a terrorist group, spread terror through out that nation, then have the right to self defense when that nation decides to knock on his door.... Add to this being a bomb maker and he had a target on his head the day he first planted an IED..... His rights ceased when he joined a terrorist group, and took part in terrorist activities, in a foreign nation....Perhaps you should check on what Afghanis laws are for terrorism....and what their punishments are....

Is false, just google it, and you'll come up with lots of names, Johnny walker the american Insurgent, charged with attempted murder, they're are many more, Afghanistan jails are full of them....

The only thing this proves is that it is next to imposiable to prove anything that has happened on a battle field. There are no CSI teams, or investaigation teams that scour the battle field.....it is searched for intel then abandoned to the locals.... _______________________ http://www.talkleft....7/12/2278/68899 Not sure what your piont is here the first statement says that the rules are so unfair they will will depress you into condessing to anything.....the statement below does not sound like it came from a depressed little boy to me, in fact he does not sound depressed at all.... ___________He is still blaming others for his actions, which is BS....yes others did play a role in his life, but nobody , forced him into planting or making IED's or take part in that fire fight....it was all him...not mom, or dad....which will not be held accountable because this is Canada....and we don't have the policitcal will, or balls....So Omar it's all on you....He needs to step up and take responabilty for his actions....

PETER F No he falls into the catagory of convicted, and admitted Murderer. How would one gather evidence in a war zone, or active battle field. Omar is like any other insurgent in Afghanistan, if you are unarmed, or laying down spread eagle proving your unarmed then you will not be engaged. your statement of "Once the American SF boys start an assault they are not going in to take prisoners. They shoot everyone" is false ....They will engage anyone they see as a threat, a threat is anyone who is armed...and while mistakes sometimes happen they are rare, and are very skilled at what they do, that is making micro second decisions that are life and death. If Omar had wanted to surrender that was a option. But someone that begs to be shot and finshed off is not really looking for surrender is he...

No inter national law justifies punishing those that have committed crimes such as young mr Omar has....And if you think any of those terrorist have morals you kidding yourself, i mean really how many morals can you have to strap explosives onto a child and send them into a crowded market place full of women and children so that you can make a piont for your cause or plant explosives on a road way that is used by local population hoping to kill Coalition forces if you don't SO BE IT it was gods will....And i'm the one with PTSD....I forgot at 15 you don't have any moral values...in fact you don't have any vision of right or wrong it magically appears once your 16.....

Eyeball if you think any nation leaves a conflict with it's morals intact your wrong, and if you think any soldier leaves a war zone with their morals in tact your wrong, and if you think a terrorist entered a war or conflict with any morals your wrong.

The whole process of defining WHO Omar is is an important one, enemy combatant, does not have the same rights as a POW (prisoner of war). and there fore not afforded the same rights as a soldier, or one who is on the battlefield following all the rules of war....Omar was an insurgent , or terrorist, he belonged to an organization that makes the KKK look like my gram mas knitting club....Not only were they intent on killing Nato Soldiers and the coalition pers, but their own people , including women and children.... They have very few rights on the battlefield, in fact their very existance on the battle field is illigal, so there actions such as taking another life, is considered murder....this is spelled out black and white in the conventions and international law....So they are not afforded the WELL ALL FAIR IN LOVE AND WAR< they were protecting themselfs.....which is complete BS, if everyone had read all the transcripts and statements, it was Omars group who open the dance, when 3 Afghan policemen knocked on their door, Omars group answered it by cutting down the 3 with automatic fire.....why because they knew they're rights, they knew they would be arrested for being insurgents....

I'm curious into how Canada failed to uphold this treaty. and although you've have posted "SOME" of what the treaty intentions are you have neglected to post some of the other portions. In fact the orginal and current Convention of child soldiers states the same that children can be held accountable for their actions...it is the punishment that differs from adults... International law does not prohibit the prosecution of children who commit war crimes, but the article 37 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child does limit the punishment that a child can receive including "Neither capital punishment nor life imprisonment without possibility of release shall be imposed for offences committed by persons below eighteen years of age."[11] You also fail to mention that this Canadian Government and US government had come to agreement on the Max sentence to give young mr Omar.... had acted on Omars behalf keeping in mind that Omar is not the only Canadian held in custody by a foreign nation. We also have to keep in mind that Omars situation is not over,and perhaps rehabilitation is still forth coming. So i'd be interested in knowing what specfic act of the agreement did Canada violate ? Many child soldiers fought in the Civil war in Sierra Leone. In its wake the UN sanctioned the Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL) to try the participants for war crimes and other breaches of humanitarian law. The statute of the SCSL gave the court jurisdiction over persons aged 15 and older, however the Paris Principles state that children who participated in armed conflict: ... who are accused of crimes under international law allegedly committed while they were associated with armed forces or armed groups should be considered primarily as victims of offences against international law; not only as perpetrators. They must be treated in accordance with international law in a framework of restorative justice and social rehabilitation, consistent with international law which offers children special protection through numerous agreements and principles.[12] and this was reflected in the wording of article 7 of the SCSL statute which did not rule out prosecution but emphasised rehabilitation and society's reintegration. David Crane the first Chief Prosecutor of the Sierra Leone tribunal, chose to interpret the statute so that the tribunal's policy was to prosecute those who recruited the children rather than the children themselves no matter how heinous the crimes they had committed.[11] In the United States, prosecutors take a different view from David Crane and have repeatedly stated that they intend to try Omar Khadr, on several serious charges including murder, for offences they allege he committed in Afghanistan while fighting for the Taliban against United States forces while he was under sixteen years old. If found guilty under US law such a crime carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment.[11] On 25 October 2010, Khadr pleaded guilty to murder in violation of the laws of war, attempted murder in violation of the laws of war, conspiracy, two counts of providing material support for terrorism and spying.[13][14] This was agreed as part of a plea bargain, which would see Khadr deported to Canada after one year to serve the remaining seven years there.[15] In a letter to the U.S. military commission at Guantanamo after the plea of guilty had been heard but before the announcement of sentence, Radhika Coomaraswamy, the UN secretary-general's special representative for children and armed conflict, wrote that Khadr represents the "classic child soldier narrative: recruited by unscrupulous groups to undertake actions at the bidding of adults to fight battles they barely understand", and suggested that Khadr to be released into a rehabilitation program.[16] Omar Khadr remained in Guantanamo Bay as of July 2012, and the Canadian government continued to face international criticism for their stonewalling of his repatriation

Kraykrik: Your absolutly right , i could have done a much better job at trying to get my piont across. That being said i got tired of doing just that, as Wyle was not interested in any of the main issue asides from proving my intial statement false which he did quit well.... After that it was well like beating a dead horse to which i gave up.. And i do hope Canada can resolve all our issues peacefully, but history has shown us that is not the case in the majority of these separations, I personally believe that i won't be possiable unless Quebec can make it's demands reasonable and vice versa. And i know that the only current demands we have were ones that were being discussed during the last ref vote, and these had caused some interesting reactions amoungst the Crietien Government but how revelent they are today who knows.

Yes you were right once out of the 17 examples you provided , i think i already manned up and said so. you found the one example. but the list that did not end so well is 10 times. I was not trying to move the goal post , just refruting the other 16 examples you provided. but i guess you can't do that. your right i'm wrong, there was more than one that has ended without violence, But i already gave that to you serveral posts ago, my piont that i was trying to make here was they more often than not DO END in Violence.

Well During the last ref , the Bloc party had recieved a positive response from a small percentage of French speaking Canadian forces pers saying they would except a position in Quebecs new military, That and Quebecs reserve forces which far out number the Reg force and would likly adapt to also forming part of Quebecs forces. The numbers were enough to cause some concern in the federal government. Also there are police forces, other para military forces that Quebec could draw numbers from. Taking the equipment out of Quebec, along with their crews was to ensure A) as you stated they could not be used as leverage, but also to deny them use to Quebec B)and any of it's crew jumping ship and joining the other side....IE getting a F-18 pilot is not much good unless he has a plane to fly....Having them down in the states detered all that, Crietien also mentioned in his book that had Quebec separated the states would quarintine the A/C, and crew... Quebec has plenty of assets that could be used as leverage without using the military .But coming up with people who want to fight has never been a issue always plenty of them , normally people who have not been trained or seen combat.

Your right , why would you care to explain anything, and in your mind it did end in just a vote with no deaths or military action. But history records a very different version and it did not start with and end with a vote.

I'll give you this one,but it does not mean that they did not have their problems either.... This one have you read any of these break ups, tell me they had a clean break up including the times leading up to it, most of these stories are covered in blood....like most things Russian.....very few if any were clean....as you proclaim.... This is what happens when men can't solve things like adults...and while you have listed one example that has ended without violence , care to take a stab at all those that did end in conflict....