Army Guy Posted May 12, 2015 Report Posted May 12, 2015 Omar was not charged with anything that is defined as a war crime in international law. That's the entire problem with the process and why he will likely win appeal. If anyone committed war crimes here, it was his father and the people his father associated, dragging Omar to a foreign country and forcing him, as a child, to fight a war as an illegal combatant (as disputable as that designation is anyway, considering the US declared war against an illegal enemy). Correct me if I'm wrong , but the killing of a combatant in a war zone, by a illiegal combatant is murder and is a war crime. Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
cybercoma Posted May 12, 2015 Report Posted May 12, 2015 Correct me if I'm wrong , but the killing of a combatant in a war zone, by a illiegal combatant is murder and is a war crime.According to experts in international law, he was charged with things that are not defined under international law as war crimes by a court that could only charge for war crimes. Murder is not a war crime, even when it's done by an "illegal combatant." Quote
GostHacked Posted May 12, 2015 Report Posted May 12, 2015 Khadr is more a victim of radical terrorists than you or I will ever be. This is actually a very very very good point. Quote
GostHacked Posted May 12, 2015 Report Posted May 12, 2015 Correct me if I'm wrong , but the killing of a combatant in a war zone, by a illiegal combatant is murder and is a war crime. The only difference between an 'enemy combatant' (not illegal combatant, check the terminology) and a military soldier is the latter wears the uniform of the country he/she is from. WAR is a crime in of itself. A crime against humanity. Funny we never talk about it in those terms. A friend of mine who did a couple tours in Afghanistan was part of an operation that did not sit well with him as it seemed to involve clearing out innocent in a certain area. But since he wore a uniform, it was not considered murder. How does that sit with you? Quote
GostHacked Posted May 12, 2015 Report Posted May 12, 2015 Omar was not charged with anything that is defined as a war crime in international law. That's the entire problem with the process and why he will likely win appeal. If anyone committed war crimes here, it was his father and the people his father associated, dragging Omar to a foreign country and forcing him, as a child, to fight a war as an illegal combatant (as disputable as that designation is anyway, considering the US declared war against an illegal enemy). We can also talk about where he was held for some years before being transferred to Canada. Holding 'enemy combatants' without charge in a prison that is situated in Cuba where the USA has had serious long standing sanctions against. Wondering how all that makes sense to those berating Kadhr. Quote
cybercoma Posted May 12, 2015 Report Posted May 12, 2015 I don't understand how people can't see that this was a child taken from his home and his country, brought over there by his father, whom he loved and trusted. His father is the one that put him in this dangerous situation and indoctrinated him into a lifestyle that Khadr may have never chosen for himself, who knows. To me, this story is more about a kid who was taken advantage of and abused by his father. Only to be taken away from his father and tortured by the United States government, as a child, then as a teenager, then as a young adult. The years where we would otherwise be in middle school, then high school, then university, learning who we are and growing up, he spent being beaten and tortured by the United States government. Now go back and watch that interview he gave. He's far more well adjusted, given his experiences, than I think I or damn near anyone else would ever be. You can tell a lot about his character and it's nothing like the narrative the Harper government and bigoted neanderthals have given him. Quote
Army Guy Posted May 12, 2015 Report Posted May 12, 2015 According to experts in international law, he was charged with things that are not defined under international law as war crimes by a court that could only charge for war crimes. Murder is not a war crime, even when it's done by an "illegal combatant." Not sure what your experts are using for a source, perhaps you can provide one. As all my sources which include the genva conventions, inter national law, humanitarian law all list murder as a war crime. Even the list of war crimes list murder as its first heading. Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
jacee Posted May 12, 2015 Report Posted May 12, 2015 (edited) Not sure what your experts are using for a source, perhaps you can provide one. As all my sources which include the genva conventions, inter national law, humanitarian law all list murder as a war crime. Even the list of war crimes list murder as its first heading. Really?!Are you really going to just keep rehashing THE PAST over and over and over ... ?! Wait for the results of Khadr ' s appeal, Army Guy, or ... just move on, eh? You think Khadr should have just died ... when the US soldiers dragged him blind out from under a pile of rubble ... where he was when the grenade was thrown, according to a US soldier ... AND THEY SHOT HIM TWICE IN THE BACK ... You think he should have just died right there so you wouldn't be haunted by this ... Canadian boy 'terrorist'?! So what are you going to do Army Guy? Just going to wallow in it and make yourself suffer? Going to go ape and pick up a gun and 'finish it'?! Should we be concerned about that? I am. You can't let it go can you? . Edited May 12, 2015 by jacee Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted May 12, 2015 Report Posted May 12, 2015 Not sure what your experts are using for a source, perhaps you can provide one. As all my sources which include the genva conventions, inter national law, humanitarian law all list murder as a war crime. Even the list of war crimes list murder as its first heading. For starters the war itself was illegal. The US tried to use article 51 of UN law (which basically says you ca defend yourself against a threatening nation) after 9 11. Whoever knocked down the WTC was not a nation. As for Khadr, he languished in Gitmo for nearly 4 years before he was charged. Bush had tried to essentially cancel habeas corpus for detainees outside of US soil with a stroke of his pen. Once again, illegal as well as unconstitutional. Charging someone retroactively under a newly crafted law, and that term is used loosely when applied to the MCA, once again illegal under international law. It is little wonder the judge who granted Khadr bail had not a lot of trouble determining that his appeal case has merit. Add to that numerous reports he had been a model prisoner, and the door swung open for him. Quote
Army Guy Posted May 12, 2015 Report Posted May 12, 2015 The only difference between an 'enemy combatant' (not illegal combatant, check the terminology) and a military soldier is the latter wears the uniform of the country he/she is from. WAR is a crime in of itself. A crime against humanity. Funny we never talk about it in those terms. A friend of mine who did a couple tours in Afghanistan was part of an operation that did not sit well with him as it seemed to involve clearing out innocent in a certain area. But since he wore a uniform, it was not considered murder. How does that sit with you? Almost right, a combatant which includes enemy combatants, is one that follows the following rules. They have a chain of command, and are Responsable for suborniates. Wear a uniform or insignia that is clearly visible Carry arms openly Carry out operations that are in accordance with the rules of law.... These are the four rules that separate legal combatants from illegal combatants...... I am not familiar with this story and can not make a comment as I don't know the details.....that being said if he was involved in illegal orders or operations he as a soldier has a responsiabilty to report these actions to higher authority.... not sure what you meant by clearing out civilians from an area.....please explain. As for wearing a uniform he was not considered a murderer, is absurd, and false......soldier are held to higher standards than civilians in these regards there are no free passes.... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
jacee Posted May 12, 2015 Report Posted May 12, 2015 Horsesh!t. Soldiers get away with murdering civilians all the time. . Quote
Argus Posted May 12, 2015 Report Posted May 12, 2015 After listening to Khadr over on CBC, he seems to be a very nice person and he said when asked would he like to say anything to the PM, he said that he's a nicer person than Harper thinks he is and he thanked the Canadians public for their support and he will prove to be a good person. Given the chance he may prove to better a much better person than the Tories MP's and PM that are against him. Macleans read the entire long interview transcript done with him for a psychological report a couple of years ago. On the other, there is the still-sobering report in Maclean’s magazine from a couple of years ago, written by Michael Friscolanti, who was the first to see the complete transcript of a seven-hour interview of Khadr by forensic psychiatrist Dr. Michael Welner, hired by American prosecutors. Khadr was then 24, almost as fully realized as the handsome, dimpled charmer who last week vowed to “prove to Canadians that I am better than what they thought of me.” Welner found him charming too, but also, as Friscolanti wrote, “conniving, unrepentant, as radicalized as ever,” http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/christie-blatchford-some-observations-on-the-release-of-omar-khadr Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
cybercoma Posted May 12, 2015 Report Posted May 12, 2015 Not sure what your experts are using for a source, perhaps you can provide one. As all my sources which include the genva conventions, inter national law, humanitarian law all list murder as a war crime. Even the list of war crimes list murder as its first heading. Tell me then, when will the U.S. and Israel be cited for war crimes given the countless civilian deaths that can be classified as murder? Murder is not a war crime, nor a crime against humanity. It's a criminal offence to be tried on civilian courts with due process. Quote
Argus Posted May 12, 2015 Report Posted May 12, 2015 These sorts of posts make it difficult to treat you seriously. Slogans, not reasoning. Whaah!? Who here takes him seriously!? LOL Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted May 12, 2015 Report Posted May 12, 2015 So now he's a Canadian war hero ? He's not Canadian. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
cybercoma Posted May 12, 2015 Report Posted May 12, 2015 He's not Canadian.He was born and raised in this country. He has no other citizenship. Where were you born again? Quote
Argus Posted May 12, 2015 Report Posted May 12, 2015 People get killed in wars. If you dont want that to happen, dont start a war, especially an illegal one. But if you do, dont whine if someone gets killed. They didn't start a war, much less an illegal one. That was your buddy Osama bin Laden. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted May 12, 2015 Report Posted May 12, 2015 Treating him like a soldier would have been the correct thing to do alright...a child-soldier that is. In which case, given his 'army' has never surrendered, he should still be in a POW camp. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted May 12, 2015 Report Posted May 12, 2015 Just like all those German soldiers we executed after wwii.... oh wait.... we set them free.... We executed a helluva lot of them, actually. And a lot more were sent to prison for long periods of time. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted May 12, 2015 Report Posted May 12, 2015 Was he indoctrinated as a child into a militant religious organization to do their bidding? Or did he go to Afghanistan of his own volition? You don't need to try and hide from the question or twist it to be about throwing grenades.... Were the young German boys who grew up to join the SS and slaughter Jews indoctrinated when young? Yes. Would you have let them all go free afterward without punishment? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted May 12, 2015 Report Posted May 12, 2015 Your right Jacee, Omar was charged with murder, attempted murder, and providing assistance and support to our enemies, oh and they're is the spying thing.....some people let go to soon.... He hasn't served his sentence. The judge let him out early on bail while his lawyers appeal his sentence. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
On Guard for Thee Posted May 12, 2015 Report Posted May 12, 2015 They didn't start a war, much less an illegal one. That was your buddy Osama bin Laden. What the hell would you call it if not a war, sheesh you outdid yourself with that one. And yes it was illegal. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted May 12, 2015 Report Posted May 12, 2015 He's not Canadian. Khadrs not a Canadian now...you are on a roll today. Quote
The_Squid Posted May 12, 2015 Report Posted May 12, 2015 Were the young German boys who grew up to join the SS and slaughter Jews indoctrinated when young? Yes. Would you have let them all go free afterward without punishment? Your version of what happened to POWs after WWII is simply wrong. The average soldier was held in POW camps until after the war. Some were forced to provide labour as reparations. The vast majority were released and not punished afterwards for what they did during the war. Many emigrated to Britain, Canada and the USA afterwards. Funny that.... enemy soldiers immigrating to the countries that they fought... A grand total of two children were convicted of war crimes in WWII. These children shot POWs. There was debate even back then whether it was right to convict children. There hasn't been a single child charged with war crimes since. So, yes... the vast majority of SS child soldiers were let go. Quote
The_Squid Posted May 12, 2015 Report Posted May 12, 2015 Khadrs not a Canadian now...you are on a roll today. That comment made no sense whatsoever... It's like Argus is just making stuff up on the fly without any regard for actual facts! Quote
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.