Active Users:197 Time:20/05/2019 02:21:46 PM
Re: Indeed aerocontrols - 29/01/2003 04:05:05 PM

WHO DECIDES WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS AN EXIT CLAUSE? AND ARE YOU SAYING THAT HUMANS ARE NOT FREE AND THEY MUST ABIDE BY THE POWERS' LIMITATIONS OF CHOICE?

The framers of the treaty decide that. In the case of the bilateral ABM treaty between the US and USSR, it was the two countries who negotiated and signed the treaty.

In the case of the NPT, I'm not sure who wrote it, but every country on the face of the earth was free to choose not to sign it. As I have pointed out, many did not. (Is Pakistan less free than Iraq? Pakistan never signed it. It was their choice. Iraq chose differently.)

Does it not bother you that the United States has assumed all authority to dictate over other countries that do not have much money or technology?

If it were true, it would bother me. However, the fact that many countries did not participate in the NPT indicates to me that it is not true.

If a US Armed Forces person was captured in Iraq, Vietnam, Korea, Afghanistan, or anywhere else where it was not a "WAR", we would prosecute them if they did not abide by the Geneva Convention.

You are clearly wrong. Read John McCain's biography that spells out how he was tortured for 5 years. Now find me a single person prosecuted for that torture. (there are none)

Further, while John McCain was in that prison (along with many other men who were shot down over North Vietnam) a non-military prisoner was added to the prison. (whose name I forget, but I can look it up if you want me to). This man was a CIA operative who had been working in the North. McCain makes it perfectly clear that everyone (all the prisoners) knew that that man was not protected by the Geneva convention, because he was an illegal combattant. The Geneva convention spells out what must be done to ensure that your soldiers are entitled to combatant status, and neither that prisoner nor the Taliban nor Al Qaeda crossed even the first hurdle. (wearing uniforms and carrying identification) Nevertheless, the administration decided to treat the bulk of the Taliban military force as POWs, and asserted its right under the Geneva Convention to treat Al Qaeda as illegal combattants. (Just what was done to that CIA agent in Viet Nam)

Did you know Congress has to declare war for our armed forces to be committed for more than 90 days? Not only is our government illegitimate, it does not follow it's own laws...

This is almost correct. The president has 90 days to conduct hostilities before he requires congressional approval. The specific clause of the War Powers Act is:

unless the Congress has declared war or has enacted a specific authorization for such use of United States Armed Forces

http://www.cs.indiana.edu/statecraft/warpow.html

The president received broad authorization from Congress in Sept 2001 for acting against Al Qeada, and received authorization for acting against Iraq last Fall. Please describe the manner in which you believe the law was not followed.

I am not trying to be mean to you-you could be really cool, but I always try to see from the other point of view, and in this case, the other view is not American. Most of the world thinks America does too much and is hypocritical of itself.

It's important to look at the concerns of all sides.

aerocontrols


"Well I'm in business, the business of kicking your a$$, and let me tell you...business is boomin'. I'm open for business, the business of givin' you the business...


Soylent Green is my kind of people.

Click to see my webcam!




View/create new replies Sign up for a premium account to add posts to a list of favourites!
Condoleeza Rice on Compliance 101..... - 23/01/2003 01:03:21 PM 205 Views
Was hoping someone would post this article... - 23/01/2003 01:18:03 PM 38 Views
I expect the silence to be deafening.... - 23/01/2003 02:03:46 PM 25 Views
i'd vote for her instead of a LOT of others who might run *NM* - 23/01/2003 03:51:14 PM 3 Views
Alright then, question... - 23/01/2003 03:40:22 PM 27 Views
Well... - 23/01/2003 03:45:59 PM 22 Views
I never knew your name was Earnest! - 23/01/2003 03:57:59 PM 20 Views
Ah, I see. - 23/01/2003 05:36:47 PM 12 Views
There are many differences between the USA and Iraq - 23/01/2003 04:11:14 PM 17 Views
Re: Alright then, question... - 23/01/2003 05:04:13 PM 16 Views
a spectacular example of why.... - 23/01/2003 03:53:54 PM 19 Views
a couple quick little points - 23/01/2003 04:25:34 PM 28 Views
*taps wadsies patella tendon....watches leg jump* - 23/01/2003 04:33:09 PM 24 Views
actually........ - 23/01/2003 04:54:39 PM 20 Views
Re: actually........ - 23/01/2003 06:08:51 PM 18 Views
ooooooh - 23/01/2003 09:08:29 PM 18 Views
Thank you - 23/01/2003 09:32:03 PM 16 Views
Oil - 24/01/2003 04:00:46 AM 18 Views
Short answer Iraq, long answer same but I use more words *NM* - 24/01/2003 07:47:18 AM 5 Views
All nations with a lot to gain by doing it - 24/01/2003 07:55:14 AM 10 Views
Iraq hasn't been ostracized like South Africa? *NM* - 24/01/2003 11:28:37 AM 4 Views
Not for as long or as heavily, also SA had a ruling class with - 24/01/2003 12:08:57 PM 7 Views
agreed...but still analogous. Iraq wants sanctions lifted *NM* - 24/01/2003 12:16:28 PM 3 Views
Ignore, double post, I hate computers they're the tool of satan - 24/01/2003 07:55:14 AM 9 Views
Understanding Something... - 24/01/2003 10:40:56 AM 18 Views
Helping you understand - 24/01/2003 10:50:20 AM 22 Views
Re: POW - 24/01/2003 12:54:28 PM 17 Views
No problem - 24/01/2003 01:00:08 PM 18 Views
Helping me understand - 24/01/2003 04:08:46 PM 15 Views
Indeed - 24/01/2003 04:26:33 PM 16 Views
Re: Indeed - 29/01/2003 03:22:43 PM 11 Views
Re: Indeed - 29/01/2003 04:05:05 PM 13 Views
Rule breaking - 30/01/2003 04:53:26 AM 8 Views
Re: Rule breaking - 30/01/2003 06:59:12 AM 14 Views
To be honest - 30/01/2003 07:31:20 AM 6 Views
I took him to mean - 30/01/2003 07:36:45 AM 9 Views
Re: I took him to mean - 30/01/2003 08:08:35 AM 6 Views
Conversing - 30/01/2003 09:04:31 AM 10 Views