Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Closed Thread
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-03-2011, 09:05 AM   #76
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Parallax's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Dakota
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 19,325
QuoteOriginally posted by skyredoubt Quote
So, is your point that any human being - and for me it was never about him being specifically a US citizen - any human being can be killed by a government - US or Yemeni or otherwise - if this government declares that this human being to be an assassination target? Without due process? Is this your point?
It's been that way time immemorial; but no, that wasn't my point.
My point was that you keep asserting that he, while standing on Yemeni soil, has a right to free speech. I was merely asking for a link to information that would support that.

10-03-2011, 09:55 AM   #77
Veteran Member
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,830
QuoteOriginally posted by skyredoubt Quote
Sorry, but that stretches the meaning of "war" too far. We don't have a war with Yemen and Yemen is not a war zone. That there exists an organization that is an enemy of the United States does not in itself constitute "war". IT is just too slippery a slope.

Basically, it goes back to the point of whether there was ever enough due process given the circumstances. Yes, it is about balancing national security, with its need for secrecy, and the lofty ideas of justice and due process. Gene, I can you you trying to strike the balance, but I believe that you're coming on the wrong side here. Ask yourself this: would Obama the candidate have approved of the assassination? Of course, we cannot be sure, but my best guess is he wouldn't have. Not that it proves anything, but it is food for thought.
We'll have to agree to disagree about the War paradigm. I think a "war" on a tactic or a substance or the like is rhetorical and can't be used as a legal basis. On the other hand, "War" 200 years ago meant two nations declaring a war in writing, lining up their armies in pretty uniforms and shooting at each other across an open field. When that "war" came to the New World and guys in buckskin started shooting from behind trees, it had to be redefined.

No definition of war has ever required that the fighting all occur on the land of one of the combatants, so the part about Yemen being at war is a bit of a red herring. Sticking to a definition of "war" that requires all combatants to be soldiers of a country with contiguous borders recognized by international law or the like is also as antiquated as the muzzle loaders in the field. An organization with self-identified members which openly declares war and kills our citizens is at war even if it does not control a body of contiguous land. If controlling land is considered necessary for a party to be at "war" then there could never be a war with rebels or guerrillas or a government in exile.

BTW, I'm not a fan of the slippery slope as an argument for anything. The world is exists in shades and we have to pick the spot to hold our ground based on the facts of the particular situation, not what could be the next step or the step after that. Also, Obama the candidate was pretty consistent with this approach, and he caught some attention when he stated that he would go into Pakistan to pursue AQ. Obama willing to invade Pakistan in al-Qaeda hunt - Times Online

If there were an effective world court created for this sort of thing, then I would be all for it. There isn't. We are stuck with war.

Last edited by GeneV; 10-03-2011 at 11:08 AM.
10-03-2011, 01:11 PM   #78
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Detroit
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,491
I have to agree with this guys take on the situation.
Add in the Patriot Act and it's a slam dunk.

Anwar al-Awlaki and drone strikes on U.S. citizens: “Due process” won’t stop drone assassinations. - Slate Magazine
10-03-2011, 01:16 PM   #79
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Parallax's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Dakota
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 19,325
QuoteQuote:
A man who had killed Americans without being here was killed in Yemen by Americans who weren’t there.
Seems perfectly fair to me.

10-03-2011, 01:22 PM   #80
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Detroit
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,491
What goes around, comes around.

~Waylon Jennings~
10-03-2011, 02:54 PM   #81
Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 15,903
QuoteOriginally posted by GeneV Quote
That's basically how I see it, Les.

I have serious reservations about the so-called "war on terror," because that is truly vague. However, there is no mistaking the fact that, as an organization, AQ has declared war on the U.S. (and much of the western world). This specific organization has repeatedly murdered, and has as its goal elimination of our way of life. If an individual voluntarily identifies with this organization and voluntarily carries out acts in furtherance of its goals, that person is a combatant in a war against the U.S.
Then that would make the AQ prisoners that your country is holding incommunicado at Guantanamo bay prisoners of war, and the USA is in breach of the Geneva Convention.
You guys want it both ways, and end up looking worse than the people you are fighting.
10-03-2011, 02:57 PM   #82
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Parallax's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Dakota
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 19,325
QuoteOriginally posted by shooz Quote
What goes around, comes around.

~Waylon Jennings~
"Just because I don't care doesn't mean I don't understand."
~Homer Simpson

10-03-2011, 04:45 PM   #83
Veteran Member
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,830
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
Then that would make the AQ prisoners that your country is holding incommunicado at Guantanamo bay prisoners of war, and the USA is in breach of the Geneva Convention.
You guys want it both ways, and end up looking worse than the people you are fighting.
Have I said anything supporting the actions in Guantanamo? Just asking.
10-03-2011, 07:53 PM   #84
Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 15,903
My point is, if I am sober enough to have one,is approving of one, but disapproving of the other is kinda confusing.
10-03-2011, 10:23 PM   #85
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Detroit
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,491
I have to agree with Wheat here.
Obama did say he was gonna do something about Guantanamo.
Must have been before he met with the Pentagon.
I guess he's busy fending off teabagger attacks.
10-04-2011, 12:12 AM   #86
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Ferguson, Mo.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,348
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
USA is in breach of the Geneva Convention
In what regard wheat, "AQ" is not signatory to said convention.How could I
be in contractual breach with you if no contract exist in first place.


as W.T. Sherman said "War is hell"
10-04-2011, 06:10 AM   #87
Veteran Member
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,830
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
My point is, if I am sober enough to have one,is approving of one, but disapproving of the other is kinda confusing.
This may or may not help, but the difference with Guantanamo for me is that the government went out and bought or scooped up suspects on questionable information and kept them until they talked (or not), sometimes applying coercion or torture. Even when nothing was found to incriminate them, they were kept. I don't know what President Obama found out after becoming president which changed his position on the camp.

I, personally, have a completely different feeling about how we treat a person who publicly says basically, "I am Al Qaeda, hear me roar." Al Awlaki publicly stated that he had trained Al Qaeda operatives who killed, and he was proud of it, and would continue to devote his life to seeing that more Americans and other westerners were killed, as should every able-bodied Muslim. His devotees included three 9/11 hijackers, a 9/11 planner and several of the more recent terrorists and murderers. He has connections to terrorist attacks all over the world.

He was tried in absentia in Yemen and convicted of being part of the killing of a French guard. Yemen seems to have been playing a bit of a game here.

Last edited by GeneV; 10-04-2011 at 06:47 AM.
10-04-2011, 07:03 AM   #88
Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 15,903
QuoteOriginally posted by BillM Quote
In what regard wheat, "AQ" is not signatory to said convention.How could I
be in contractual breach with you if no contract exist in first place.
Your contract is with the Geneva Convention, which specifies how prisoners of war are to be treated. Show me where the enemy also needs to be a signatory to it for it's prisoners to be treated humanely.
10-04-2011, 07:33 AM   #89
Veteran Member
MRRiley's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Sterling, VA, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,275
Bill,

The Geneva Conventions apply to wars between 2 or more sovereign nation states (ie they do not apply to civil wars or non-state-sponsored hostilities). They do not recognize any lawful status for combatants in conflicts not involving two or more nation states (ie: Robert E. Lee would not have been protected under the conventions if they had existed at the time). By both of those principles the Geneva Conventions do not apply as a matter of international law to terrorists caught or killed as part of the "war on terror" unless perhaps they are Iraqi, Afghani or North Korean (and maybe Libyan).

Yemen could perhaps file a complaint, under some general provision of the conventions perhaps concerning territorial sovereignty, about al Awlaki's killing on their soil, but I strongly suspect they are, at least officially, just as glad he is dead as I am. Don't expect anything more than a pro-forma complaint from Yemen...

Mike
10-04-2011, 07:52 AM   #90
Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 15,903
Mike, do you think that is the spirit of the pact when it was written?
Or are you just applying a convenient way of opting out?
Closed Thread

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Nature Deadly tonadoes hit Massachusetts charliezap Post Your Photos! 11 06-03-2011 06:15 AM
Landscape Fall colors hit New Haven rm2 Post Your Photos! 2 10-22-2010 12:24 AM
Hit the beach, hard tay_diggs Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 8 07-27-2010 12:43 AM
Up in NY and a small case of LBA hit me 41ants Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 9 05-26-2010 12:54 PM
KX- a sales hit- colours are popular lesmore49 Pentax DSLR Discussion 5 12-25-2009 05:31 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:52 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top