Jump to content

Compensating Khadr


Recommended Posts

48 minutes ago, ZenOps said:

BTW:  Its completely silly for the US to sue Khadr.

If Khadr was three years older, and had a sniper rifle - Absolutely no one would be questioning a military casualty.  You lost, man to man against a defending force, you don't get to sue the enemy sniper when you are trying to snipe him.  That is simply the craziest thing I've ever heard.

I think the US is just buttsore that with the massive spending and supposed military superiority, that they lost to a 15 year old kid with $20 worth of homemade explosives.

Side note:  The US also almost lost a $1.5 Billion destroyer to a collision with a Japanese/philipino freighter that was only about 3x the size.

Could you sue because the ship was made of wet cardboard instead of hardened steel?  Maybe.  Could you sue because the flak jacket was made of wet cardboard instead of grenade absorbing materials?  Maybe.  Can you sue a guy for trying to defend his home, family and friends?  According to the US - yes you can.

And if that is the common sentiment in the US, Fuck the US.

Apparently you don't follow the law .....he was not in a defending force....he was in a terrorist group....hence the unlawful combatant....both are against canadian law.....

but here is the ball buster, he was a canadian....hence why we are having this conversation....not afghanis, so no defending the home.....family or friends sorry....according to the law.....he was an unlawful combatant, that's code for terrorist....or legitimate targets...to be shot on site, he is very lucky to be alive because terrorist are not normally afforded second chances....normally they are sent to pick up their 72 virgins.....

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So why was Khadr not brought instantly back to Canada after the incident and be tried? Why was he sent off to GITMO instead? 

This is part of the contention. There were worse people who did a stint at GITMO then released back into those troubled nations to cause even MORE trouble. GITMO is all on the up and up right? I mean it's illegal to hold someone in a prison indefinitely without a charge, correct? Extraordinary Renditioning is all on the up and up as well right? 

Even if he actually commit those acts, Canada should have hauled his ass back here and tried him here. GITMO should not have been an option.

What about every civilian that dies from Canada's actions in Afghanistan? Nothing more than an apology of 'oops' while Khadr is sent off to GITMO.

Otherwise he would have been a POW if he was part of another nation's military and treated very differently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Does the fact that the American combatants in this engagement were not wearing uniforms or any insignia to indicate they were American soldiers affect the legal issue? They were dressed as Afgan civilians.

that's not what the pictures show when US military members were treating Omars wounds on the battle field....now there may have been some dressed in afghan garb, but they carried wpns openly and if you check the Conventions that is one of the requirements....

4.1.2 Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organised resistance movements, provided that they fulfill all of the following conditions:

  • that of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
  • that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognisable at a distance (there are limited exceptions to this among countries who observe the 1977 Protocol I);
  • that of carrying arms openly;
  • that of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Does the fact that the American combatants in this engagement were not wearing uniforms or any insignia to indicate they were American soldiers affect the legal issue? They were dressed as Afgan civilians.

Afghan civilians apparently dress as American military?

omar.JPG

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, GostHacked said:

So why was Khadr not brought instantly back to Canada after the incident and be tried? Why was he sent off to GITMO instead? 

This is part of the contention. There were worse people who did a stint at GITMO then released back into those troubled nations to cause even MORE trouble. GITMO is all on the up and up right? I mean it's illegal to hold someone in a prison indefinitely without a charge, correct? Extraordinary Renditioning is all on the up and up as well right? 

Even if he actually commit those acts, Canada should have hauled his ass back here and tried him here. GITMO should not have been an option.

What about every civilian that dies from Canada's actions in Afghanistan? Nothing more than an apology of 'oops' while Khadr is sent off to GITMO.

Otherwise he would have been a POW if he was part of another nation's military and treated very differently.

Omar was captured by the US military, therefore their Prisoner....their responsibility, Gitmo was the site they stored all their prisoners for lack of a fitting term....

I am not defending what happened at gitmo, nor do i condone the use of mild torture to obtain info. and no it is not illegal, it does say that everyone should be classified as soon as possible, what i mean is there true identity handed to them, ie POW, illegal combatant, terrorist, spy etc etc...then criminal proceedings can take place.....that being said any nation can hold POW's forever, normally at the end of the conflict pow exchanges happen....here the conflict is not over, it was only through Canadian government intervention that omar is not still in US prison or given the lethal injection....whoops we forgot that part.....what should have happened is he should of been handed over to the Afghan government once his US sentence completed....i wonder if they would agree to a pay out, i think they would have handed him a shovel and dragged his ass out into the desert.....

Remember he was a US prisoner, in their charge, and Canada was not lobby to have him brought back to Canada very hard, i mean what would we do with him, give him his own jail....that and the fact can you imagine how much media would have been generated on a treason charge....

I do not know why Canada did not charge him with any crimes he committed....my guess would be the government of the day wanted the whole thing to blow over.....and die....

Civilian deaths are covered under the conventions, they are to be minimised , they can not be eliminated totally.....this is war and death plays a huge role in it, and for the most part the civilians pay a huge price, normally the largest price....after all this is not lazer tag....don't mean to sound cold, but the nation needs to know that each time we send our military to the worlds shit holes to peace keep or make peace that it comes at a cost....

He is a terrorist , nothing more he is not afforded any rights under the convention, except the bare minimum....had he been part of another military yes he would have been treated differently, 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Army Guy said:

Omar was captured by the US military, therefore their Prisoner....their responsibility, Gitmo was the site they stored all their prisoners for lack of a fitting term....

.........

He is a terrorist , nothing more he is not afforded any rights under the convention, except the bare minimum....had he been part of another military yes he would have been treated differently, 

 

To many Afghans,  YOU were the terrorist. It's all about optics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, GostHacked said:

 

To many Afghans,  YOU were the terrorist. It's all about optics.

Yes to some we were terrorists,to most we offered them democracy and they took it along with everything that went with it..... not many Afghans wanted the taliban back, 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

Yes to some we were terrorists,to most we offered them democracy and they took it along with everything that went with it..... not many Afghans wanted the taliban back, 

Considering most of Afghanistan is not under any 'democratic' rule, I call bull on this notion.  Let's arm Al-Queda, to fight the Soviets, then have to deal with that issue for the next 40 years. It's called blowback for a reason. The Taliban still seems to rule most of the nation regardless of how our media portrays it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Democracy my fn ass. Omar Kadr a victim entitled to 10 million my f'n ass. Trying to justify terrorism my f'n ass.

So now you want to lecture that its ok for Kadr to engage in terrorism because you don't like certain governments.

Oh well then that settles it.

Who the fk cares what you think of Karzai or his corrupt government that does not excuse what Kadr was and remains-an unrepentant terrorist.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, GostHacked said:

Democratic my f'n ass.

I read somewhere that we should not expect that other countries adopt our style of democracy to the letter. Those countries who are new to democratic government will determine for themselves what type of democracy works best for them with the tools they have at their disposal and the characteristics of the society to be governed. Afghanistan is new to the game and that country will one day find its way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, GostHacked said:

Considering most of Afghanistan is not under any 'democratic' rule, I call bull on this notion.  Let's arm Al-Queda, to fight the Soviets, then have to deal with that issue for the next 40 years. It's called blowback for a reason. The Taliban still seems to rule most of the nation regardless of how our media portrays it.

Horse crap. In the areas Canadian soldiers were present it was. You know what Canadian soldiers are? Let me explain. They wear uniforms. They follow the Geneva war convention. They do everything and defend everything Kadr spits on. The damn government won't spend money on vets returning from Afghanistan-they have epidemic rates of suicide and they have the audacity to give 10 million to someone who went to Afghanistan to kill innocent civilians and Canadian soldiers?

Yah of course you have no problem with it.  Omar live in your neighbourhood and marry into your family yah right. 

If he lit off a firecracker or farted you'd be the first on the phone dialing 911.

Oh wait that will trigger Hot Enough to see melting pylons. I should have spelled out 9 11.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, capricorn said:

I read somewhere that we should not expect that other countries adopt our style of democracy to the letter. Those countries who are new to democratic government will determine for themselves what type of democracy works best for them with the tools they have at their disposal and the characteristics of the society to be governed. Afghanistan is new to the game and that country will one day find its way.

Sure and we will help funding Kadrs to go there and kill their innocent civilians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Rue said:

Sure and we will help funding Kadrs to go there and kill their innocent civilians.

Rue, I share your outrage at this obscene payout to a traitorous jihadist. Unfortunately, successive Canadian governments have failed to address the problem of Canadians of convenience who suck on our generosity then leave to fight against our military and our allies in foreign countries. We need a government with balls to tackle this head on, not one led by a celebrity who compares his socks to those he happens to be sitting by.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Army Guy said:

I do not know why Canada did not charge him with any crimes he committed....my guess would be the government of the day wanted the whole thing to blow over.....and die....

Exactly.  Trying him would have risked changing his status to that of prisoner-of-war which would open a Pandora's Box of issues related to the illegality of the treatment other POW's and our participation in a conflict based on a rapidly crumbling moral footing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Justin Trudeau refused to  provide ransom for two Canadians who eventually were beheaded. 

 

 

What's the reason why he didn't secure their release, and he let them get butchered? 

BECAUSE.................. PAYING RANSOM, SETS A BAD EXAMPLE.  IT WILL ENDANGER THE LIVES OF CANADIANS ALL OVER THE WORLD.

 

.........and here we are, setting an example on HOW TO PLAY CANADIANS FOR SUCKERS!

 

Giving $10 million dollars to a terrorist - because we've allegedly violated his alleged rights.............................who was committing treason with his family (and helping kill Canadian soldiers, among others)................................by being complicit to his questioning in Guantanamo!  DUH?

 

Let not his citizenship put wool over our eyes and gets us all mushy. An enemy is an enemy.  Perhaps the most dangerous is the enemy from within.

The Khadrs were on the side of the enemies, like the ones who butchered two innocent Canadians.

 

If we're guilty by being complicit to the brutal interrogation of a Canadian enemy (who deliberately and purposefully murdered, and maim ally soldiers)..........

........then, we are complicit to the murder of two Canadians, whose only mistake was being at the wrong place, at the wrong time!

 

Withholding ransom which led to the death of two Canadians, and yet rewarding a terrorist with millions......whom ironically, belongs to same kind of terrorists that butchered the two Canadians.

How do you score that with the families of these two innocent Canadians?  How do you explain that to us?

Edited by betsy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, capricorn said:

Rue, I share your outrage at this obscene payout to a traitorous jihadist. Unfortunately, successive Canadian governments have failed to address the problem of Canadians of convenience who suck on our generosity then leave to fight against our military and our allies in foreign countries.

The military were involved in an illegal invasion of a sovereign nation, the ultimate war crime. You are supporting war criminals and terrorists. What don't you understand about the US government in negotiations with the Taliban until August of 2001. What don't you understand about a false flag event, one on many US false flag events to lie their way into two illegal invasions, not to mention, Libya and Syria, more US terrorism. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, betsy said:

If we're guilty by being complicit to the brutal interrogation of a Canadian enemy (who deliberately and purposefully murdered, and maim ally soldiers)..........

........then, we are complicit to the murder of two Canadians, whose only mistake was being at the wrong place, at the wrong time!

You are guilty of being complicit in the murders of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and Afghans. You are guilty of being a enthusiastic supporter of known war criminals and terrorists, known torturers who run torture chambers around the world. Known murderers who behead, dismember alive, napalm, "shake and bake", murder children, ... . 

Now that is christianity, big time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, hot enough said:

... illegal invasion ... the ultimate war crime. ....war criminals and terrorists. ... false flag event, ... US false flag events.... two illegal invasions, ....US terrorism. 

You should work on new material as you're boring and repeating yourself. Or, you could stick to your 9/11 conspiracy thread where your real talent lies.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, GostHacked said:

Considering most of Afghanistan is not under any 'democratic' rule, I call bull on this notion.  Let's arm Al-Queda, to fight the Soviets, then have to deal with that issue for the next 40 years. It's called blowback for a reason. The Taliban still seems to rule most of the nation regardless of how our media portrays it.

considering most NATO countries pulled out in 2014, leaving a skeleton force to maintain peace your right, a lot of the country has a Taliban presence.....but that was what the people in the west wanted, they wanted out , even before the job was done.....our government left, leaving Afghan to fend for itself....sorry we can't help you any more, we are leaving because our people grow tired of seeing this conflict on the tv.....what message did that send, sorry we are not reliable to help you out in time of crises, our people do not have the patients.

The fact that while NATO was there the Taliban controlled very little to none of Afghanistan.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, capricorn said:

You should work on new material as you're boring and repeating yourself. Or, you could stick to your 9/11 conspiracy thread where your real talent lies.

War crimes are war crimes and terrorism is terrorism, capricorn. Note that you are doing what all you folks regularly do, deny stark reality. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, GostHacked said:

Let's also consider Karzai, the first 'president' of new Afghanistan, which was nothing more than a chump for the oil companies. Democratic my f'n ass.

What Oil companies.....let me repeat this , no pipe lines, no oil being drilled for......

The first Afghan election seen a massive turn out, more than Canada has ever seen during its own federal elections......some of the people walked for days to get to a voting both, under the threat of death by the Taliban.....so yes Democratic.....they picked the leader they wanted..... 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,714
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    wopsas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Venandi went up a rank
      Explorer
    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...