eyeball Posted October 3, 2012 Report Share Posted October 3, 2012 Lol. I see. Okay then, see you later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Canada Posted October 3, 2012 Report Share Posted October 3, 2012 Okay then, see you later. It's good to know that I won tonights debate. Thank you for being a gracious loser. You truly are a gentleman. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bleeding heart Posted October 3, 2012 Report Share Posted October 3, 2012 War Criminal = framed? Gee what world do you inhabit? He had every opportunity to lay down his arms and surrender, instead he chose to fight and kill while being an illegal combatant. In the majority of cases child soldiers are not fighting against professionals such as the American Special Forces and are not allowed the choose of surrender. Comparing him to a child soldier is fundamentally unfair towards real child soldiers who were not given a chance to choose at the time of battle because they were fighting against people who have little regard for the value of human lives and most likely will not accept a surrender because they too are using child soldiers. This is some crazed, nationalist indoctrination to which you've been subjected. To whit: he couldn't have been a child soldier....because "child soldier" cannot be applied to anyone fighting Americans or Canadians. Since we're the Good Guys, anyone who fights us cannot be a victim in any way, shape or form. After all, it produces the wrong metrics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bleeding heart Posted October 3, 2012 Report Share Posted October 3, 2012 And did you hear about the US Army "Ranger" Who expressed sorrow and regret for slaughtering unarmed civilians in Iraq only to turn out that he never made it past basic training? What if I go on TV and make a sad sob story about how 10 years ago I tortured Khadr in Guantanamo Bay and I regret my actions, how reliable is that? You might want to look into the matter before determining that it's false. (Hint: it is legitimate, just so you know.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted October 3, 2012 Report Share Posted October 3, 2012 Afaik you weren't there so we have to take word of people who were. Many witnesses with the same story is good enough for me. No witness saw Omar throw a grenade. The initial military report said Omar must have thrown the grenade because he was the only one left alive. Later it was reported that another older man was still alive ... and was shot after the grenade went off. One US soldier said Omar could not have thrown the grenade because he was already under the pile of rubble when it went off: The soldier was standing on top of it. Those are the facts ... http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/omar-khadrs-return-an-unavoidable-evil/article4578639/?service=mobile Still,Omar Khadr’s ongoing legal saga has made history. - He was the first adolescent charged with war crimes before a U.S. military tribunal since the Second World War. - Of the 2,000 Americans and (150-plus Canadians) killed in Afghanistan, Mr. Khadr is the only captured enemy to have been charged with murder for a combat death. _______________________ http://www.talkleft.com/story/2010/7/12/2278/68899 The unfairness of the rules will make a person so depressed that he will admit to any allegations or take a plea offer that will satisfy the U.S. government.” ...I will not willingly let the U.S. government use me to fulfill its goal,” Mr. Khadr said. “I have been used too many times when I was a child, and that's why I'm here – taking blame for things I didn't have a choice in doing, but was forced to do by elders.” ___________ http://www.talkleft.com/story/2006/10/02/365/70227 The problem is, Omar Khadr is as much a victim of these people as a member of the family. He's eighteen years old. When he was captured in Afghanistan, he was fifteen -- a child turned into a soldier by parents from hell. And our government's response to this victim of child abuse was to abuse him further. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Signals.Cpl Posted October 3, 2012 Report Share Posted October 3, 2012 Let me guess, Allah? So you think he had no legal representation? If so you REALLY need to acquaint yourself with the particulars of the subject at hand. It seems really stupid on your part to argue that he was a minor with no legal representation when he pled guilty and he was 23 with a number of lawyers representing him, both US military and civilian lawyers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Signals.Cpl Posted October 3, 2012 Report Share Posted October 3, 2012 This is some crazed, nationalist indoctrination to which you've been subjected. To whit: he couldn't have been a child soldier....because "child soldier" cannot be applied to anyone fighting Americans or Canadians. After all, it produces the wrong metrics. No, he cannot be a child soldier because he had multiple chances of surrender during that one day and he did not take any of them while choosing to fight and kill instead. At some point being "forced" to do something stops being an excuse when you have a choice to do the right thing and you don't do it. There was a grenade and he threw it, if he had refrained from throwing it then he would have sad in Guantanamo Bay for a few months to a couple of years and would have been released. Since we're the Good Guys, anyone who fights us cannot be a victim in any way, shape or form. No, anyone who is given a choice cannot fall in to the category with those who are given no choice over their actions. He was given a choice to surrender without fighting and he chose to fight, while child soldiers are not given a chance to choose to surrender. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Signals.Cpl Posted October 3, 2012 Report Share Posted October 3, 2012 You might want to look into the matter before determining that it's false. (Hint: it is legitimate, just so you know.) I would wager to say that not everything you see on tv is real, and not every one who was there did what they claim they did. Care to explain how this guy was real? What kind of evidence does he bring to the table that would suggest everything or anything he says is real? for all we know he could have been the base cook, or a garbage collector, what undeniable evidence does he bring to the table? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bleeding heart Posted October 3, 2012 Report Share Posted October 3, 2012 No, he cannot be a child soldier because he had multiple chances of surrender during that one day and he did not take any of them while choosing to fight and kill instead. At some point being "forced" to do something stops being an excuse when you have a choice to do the right thing and you don't do it. There was a grenade and he threw it, if he had refrained from throwing it then he would have sad in Guantanamo Bay for a few months to a couple of years and would have been released. On the contrary, it is well-understood that psychological effects and indoctrination are crucial aspects of the child-soldier phenomenon; that is, we rationally understand that a child under duress and indoctrination cannot be expected to make adult choices. Now, if you wish to advocate for allowing all adult rights to fifteen-year-olds (buying and consuming alcohol, the right to vote, the right to make personal choices about getting married, going to school, and on and on) to correspond to their adult responsibilities...then you've got an argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted October 3, 2012 Report Share Posted October 3, 2012 Does one need to be 'indoctrinated' to go hunting with one's father? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bleeding heart Posted October 3, 2012 Report Share Posted October 3, 2012 Does one need to be 'indoctrinated' to go hunting with one's father? We're talking about two rather different types of "hunting." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted October 3, 2012 Report Share Posted October 3, 2012 We're talking about two rather different types of "hunting." Are we? Is it your view that Omar was dragged kicking and screaming to go on 'Safari' with his father? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deuce Posted October 3, 2012 Report Share Posted October 3, 2012 Afaik you weren't there so we have to take word of people who were. Many witnesses with the same story is good enough for me. When these witnesses use terminology like "probably" and "most likely" and "it was reasonable to assume", excuse posters like eyeball and I for being a little bit skeptical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bleeding heart Posted October 3, 2012 Report Share Posted October 3, 2012 (edited) Are we? Is it your view that Omar was dragged kicking and screaming to go on 'Safari' with his father? No, it's that a fifteen year old in most cases is going to do everything and anything to please his father...and has only just started to see him as something less than a god, in many cases. When the father's a violent radical, it can have bad effects. And I place Omar's responsibility at the level of a fifteen year old--that is, at the level of a person who is deemed unfit to drink, smoke, vote, or even work at Canadian Walmarts. It's nowhere near zero responsbility...but it sure as hell isn't adult level, either. Edited October 3, 2012 by bleeding heart Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deuce Posted October 3, 2012 Report Share Posted October 3, 2012 So if I went off overseas and killed Americans in war you would support me as well? If you were a child who was forced to go overseas by neurotic family members and still a child at the time of your capture, yes I would support you. Ok great. Give me an example of a time when you wouldn't support me going overseas to kill Americans in war. You are 18+ and go overseas on your own accord, your own free will. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted October 3, 2012 Report Share Posted October 3, 2012 Are we? Is it your view that Omar was dragged kicking and screaming to go on 'Safari' with his father? It's irrelevant how a child reacts to parental control: It's a fact that he was under parental control. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted October 3, 2012 Report Share Posted October 3, 2012 If you were a child who was forced to go overseas by neurotic family members and still a child at the time of your capture, yes I would support you. You are 18+ and go overseas on your own accord, your own free will. Can you provide some evidence that Omar was forced to go adventuring in outback with his father? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deuce Posted October 3, 2012 Report Share Posted October 3, 2012 Can you provide some evidence that Omar was forced to go adventuring in outback with his father? His father signed him (as well as his other brothers) up for AQ training camps. He moved him into a compound where he and his family lived with Usama Bin Laden. Or are you suggesting that Omar, as a six year old was able to travel freely and independently without cost between Canada, Afghanistan and Pakistan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted October 3, 2012 Report Share Posted October 3, 2012 (edited) Can you provide some evidence that Omar was forced to go adventuring in outback with his father? Yes. He was a minor child. No further proof needed. In his words ... Mr. Khadr said. “I have been used too many times when I was a child, and that's why I'm here – taking blame for things I didn't have a choice in doing, but was forced to do by elders.” http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=21596&view=findpost&p=837629 Edited October 3, 2012 by jacee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted October 3, 2012 Report Share Posted October 3, 2012 Yes. He was a minor child. No further proof needed. In his words ... Mr. Khadr said. “I have been used too many times when I was a child, and that's why I'm here – taking blame for things I didn't have a choice in doing, but was forced to do by elders.” I find it interesting you'd use Omar's own words as 'proof' he was forced to go on high adventure with his father. Let's ask Manson if he was framed by 'whitey' while were at it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted October 3, 2012 Report Share Posted October 3, 2012 I find it interesting you'd use Omar's own words as 'proof' he was forced to go on high adventure with his father. Let's ask Manson if he was framed by 'whitey' while were at it. Look at those goalposts go! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted October 3, 2012 Report Share Posted October 3, 2012 Look at those goalposts go! Was Manson framed? Do you take his word? Of course Omar is going to claim that he had 16 ton weights dropped on his head rather than admit willing participation with his father. He's not stupid. Now perhaps you grew-up w/o a father or had a father who abused you, but I LOVED doing things with mine. Flying, camping, fishing, hunting, boating...it was all good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted October 3, 2012 Report Share Posted October 3, 2012 Was Manson framed? Do you take his word? Of course Omar is going to claim that he had 16 ton weights dropped on his head rather than admit willing participation with his father. He's not stupid. Now perhaps you grew-up w/o a father or had a father who abused you, but I LOVED doing things with mine. Flying, camping, fishing, hunting, boating...it was all good. Point is you asked for proof. Proof was provided. You decided proof offered did not meet your (unstated) standard for proof. Goalposts shifted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted October 3, 2012 Report Share Posted October 3, 2012 Point is you asked for proof. Proof was provided. You decided proof offered did not meet your (unstated) standard for proof. Goalposts shifted. Proof was not provided. A statement by Khadr was provided. The point remains: your claim and others is that he was dragged kicking and screaming while mine is that kids like to do things with their dads. Perhaps you can devote your energies towards proving that children do not love their fathers before you start making anymore football analogies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted October 3, 2012 Report Share Posted October 3, 2012 (edited) Yes. He was a minor child. No further proof needed. In his words ... Mr. Khadr said. “I have been used too many times when I was a child, and that's why I'm here – taking blame for things I didn't have a choice in doing, but was forced to do by elders.” http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=21596&view=findpost&p=837629 I agree...the idiocy on display here is disturbing...we wouldn't be having this discussion if it was a christian kid in canada in trouble with our laws because of his parents, we would've removed him from his family's influence and set about helping him...we'd be universally condemning the atrocious standard of justice and treatment he was subjected to and dismissing any government that promoted/condoned such standards... but omar isn't a typical christian canadian kid, he's a muslim kid who has become a political target for xenophobes.... Edited October 3, 2012 by wyly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.