Page 41 of 45 FirstFirst ... 313940414243 ... LastLast
Results 401 to 410 of 447

Thread: Leaked footage from Apache showing "US military slaughter" in Baghdad

  1. #401
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    01-26-14 @ 01:29 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    3,216

    Post Re: Leaked footage from Apache showing "US military slaughter" in Baghdad

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    No actually that's the only interpretation as it is the plain English interpretation,

    the Powers who are parties thereto shall remain bound by it in their mutual relations.

    Who is "their", "their" refers to the "Powers who are parties thereto," this is basic grammar and syntax sport. Find yourself an English tutor.


    My grandfather is tenured English professor from Virginia University. He came to America through a Fullbright Scholarship.

    Now, since you do not understand English grammar concepts, let's take a look at the First Geneva Convention commentary:
    International Humanitarian Law - First 1949 Geneva Convention
    2. ' Relations between Contracting and non-Contracting Parties '

    The second sentence added by the Diplomatic Conference of 1949 has certainly the characteristics of a compromise, inasmuch as it does not come to a decision between the suspensive and the resolutory conditions. At first sight it appears to incline towards the Belgian amendment. (11) But, whereas the latter did not make the Convention applicable until after the formal acceptance of the non-Contracting Power, the sentence adopted by the Diplomatic Conference drops any reference to an invitation to be made to the non-Contracting Power, and substitutes [p.35] for the words "as from the latter Power's acceptance" the words "if the latter accepts and applies the provisions thereof".
    What then is the position in the interval between the launching of hostilities and the non-Contracting belligerent's acceptance? Is the Contracting Power released from all obligation?
    The passage of the report just quoted shows how this not very clear provision should be interpreted. The Conventions, it says, should be regarded "as being the codification of rules which are generally recognized", and it is in their spirit that the Contracting States "shall apply them, in so far as possible". (12)


    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    No they are bound insofar as the opposing side is a member of the high contracting party.
    International Humanitarian Law - First 1949 Geneva Convention
    It was in 1929 that the need for making the provision more explicit was first felt. Article 25 of the 1929 Convention Database 'IHL - Treaties & Comments', View '1.Traités \1.2. Par Article' said that "The provisions of the present Convention shall be respected by the High Contracting Parties in all circumstances". The idea was to give a more formal character to the mutual undertaking by insisting on its character as a general obligation. It was desired to avoid the possibility of a belligerent State finding some pretext for evading its obligation to apply the whole or part of the Convention.
    The provision adopted in 1949 has the effect of strengthening that of 1929. This is due both to the prominent position which it is given at the beginning of the Convention and to its actual wording. By undertaking at the very outset to respect the clauses of the Convention, the Contracting Parties draw attention to the special character of that instrument. It is not an engagement concluded on a basis of reciprocity, binding each party to the contract only in so far as the other party observes its obligations. It is rather a series of unilateral engagements solemnly contracted before the world as represented by the other Contracting Parties.
    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    No it has to do with a signatory being bound to a non-signatory if the latter accepts and upholds the Conventions.
    See above.



    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    Article 2 has nothing to do with article 13 in the first place, the people in the video do not fall under any of the categories listed in article 13:


    Art. 13. The present Convention shall apply to the wounded and sick belonging to the following categories:



    O.K. hotshot which category do these people fall under?
    WOW

    We are talking about Article 18, which allows inhabitants and relief societies to collect the wounded and sick. Inhabitants and relief societies are not unlawful combatants. They are protected by the First Geneva Convention.
    Last edited by Degreez; 04-24-10 at 08:52 PM.

  2. #402
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Past the edge of the universe, through the singularity, and out the other side.
    Last Seen
    09-01-10 @ 05:23 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,324

    Re: Leaked footage from Apache showing "US military slaughter" in Baghdad

    Quote Originally Posted by Degreez View Post


    My grandfather is tenured English professor from Virginia University. He came to America through a Fullbright Scholarship.
    Then have him tutor you in plain English, because that sentence you bolded was in regards to the mutual relations between two or more high contracting parties.

    Now, since you do not understand English grammar concepts, let's take a look at the First Geneva Convention commentary:
    International Humanitarian Law - First 1949 Geneva Convention
    Next time why not trying to post the rest:

    The spirit and character of the Conventions conclusively indicate that the Contracting Party must apply their provisions from the moment hostilities break out until such time as the adverse Party has had the time and an opportunity of stating his intentions.


    The non-contracting party in the Iraq war has clearly had time and opportunity to state their intent to uphold the GC's, however, quite to the contrary they have stated their intent through actions that they intend to violate nearly every provision therein.

    "It is not an engagement concluded on a basis of reciprocity, binding each party to the contract only in so far as the other party observes its obligations."

    That means that if one of the high contracting parties violates the GC the other High Contracting Party is still bound to them, but we are not talking about signatories to the GC in the first place so the point is mute.


    WOW

    We are talking about Article 18, which allows inhabitants and relief societies to collect the wounded and sick. Inhabitants and relief societies are not unlawful combatants. They are protected by the First Geneva Convention.
    Wow is fooking right.

    Article 13 defines the wounded and sick entitled to that treatment:

    Art. 13. The present Convention shall apply to the wounded and sick belonging to the following categories:

    (1) Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict, as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.
    (2) Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions:
    (a) that of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
    (b) that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;
    (c) that of carrying arms openly;
    (d) that of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.
    (3) Members of regular armed forces who profess allegiance to a Government or an authority not recognized by the Detaining Power.
    (4) Persons who accompany the armed forces without actually being members thereof, such as civil members of military aircraft crews, war correspondents, supply contractors, members of labour units or of services responsible for the welfare of the armed forces, provided that they have received authorization from the armed forces which they accompany.
    (5) Members of crews, including masters, pilots and apprentices, of the merchant marine and the crews of civil aircraft of the Parties to the conflict, who do not benefit by more favourable treatment under any other provisions in international law.
    (6) Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory, who on the approach of the enemy, spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, without having had time to form themselves into regular armed units, provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war.
    The people who were shot, hadn't surrendered, and were possibly still in fighting condition did not fall into any of those categories therefor they were not protected by the conventions. Once again Article 13 is in the GC specifically for these types of circumstances, because when the enemy doesn't wear a uniform then how is one supposed to differentiate between a van coming into help combatants escape and/or aid in the fighting and innocent concerned citizens?

  3. #403
    Guru
    Skateguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston/Heights
    Last Seen
    02-07-12 @ 08:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,571

    Re: Leaked footage from Apache showing "US military slaughter" in Baghdad

    they don't wear uniforms, because they are not in the Military. they are simply in their own village, on the other side of the World, trying to protect what little they have. Wouldn't you act the same way, if we were invaded?? would you just lay down and take it in the Kiester???
    "Don't be particular bout nothin, but the company you keep"

  4. #404
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Past the edge of the universe, through the singularity, and out the other side.
    Last Seen
    09-01-10 @ 05:23 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,324

    Re: Leaked footage from Apache showing "US military slaughter" in Baghdad

    Quote Originally Posted by Skateguy View Post
    they don't wear uniforms, because they are not in the Military.
    They don't wear uniforms, because they intentionally intermingle with civilians in order to use civilian sectors as cover to launch attacks, and they don't wear uniforms so as to more easily target civilians.

    they are simply in their own village, on the other side of the World, trying to protect what little they have. Wouldn't you act the same way, if we were invaded?? would you just lay down and take it in the Kiester???
    Ya because we're there to steal the goats and crops of innocent herders and farmers. In actuality what they were doing is taking up arms in order to cause instability to take down a fledgling democracy and re-institute a tyranny of the minority as it was prior to the take down of the Tikriti Baathist elite. But ya keep on believing in this noble peasant warrior fantasy that you've constructed for yourself, it sounds like you'd make a good Islamist propagandist, you've already got the pro-insurgent mentality, the twoofer mentality, now all's you got to do is close the gap and blame it on the JOOS.

    As to what I would do if I were them I would have joined the Iraqi military and be grateful for the chance that I was given to be out from under the jack boots of one of the most oppressive regimes in the latter half of the 20th century.
    Last edited by Agent Ferris; 04-25-10 at 12:47 AM.

  5. #405
    Guru
    Skateguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston/Heights
    Last Seen
    02-07-12 @ 08:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,571

    Re: Leaked footage from Apache showing "US military slaughter" in Baghdad

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    Ya because we're there to steal their goats. In actuality what they were doing is taking up arms in order to cause instability to take down a fledgling democracy and re-institute a tyranny of the minority as it was prior to the take down of the Tikriti Baathist elite. But ya keep on believing in this noble peasant warrior fantasy that you've constructed for yourself, it sounds like you'd make a good Islamist propagandist, you've already got the pro-insurgent mentality, the twoofer mentality, now all's you got to do is close the gap and blame it on the JOOS.

    As to what I would do if I were them I would have joined the Iraqi military and be grateful for the chance that I was given to be out from under the jack boots of one of the most oppressive regimes in the latter half of the 20th century.
    Cool--so one question. when did what they do over there, become our business?? don't we have fish to fry, right here at home??
    "Don't be particular bout nothin, but the company you keep"

  6. #406
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Past the edge of the universe, through the singularity, and out the other side.
    Last Seen
    09-01-10 @ 05:23 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,324

    Re: Leaked footage from Apache showing "US military slaughter" in Baghdad

    Quote Originally Posted by Skateguy View Post
    Cool--so one question. when did what they do over there, become our business?? don't we have fish to fry, right here at home??
    It became our business after Saddam's numerous acts of war which he perpetrated against the U.S.. It became our business after Saddam started recruiting from and cooperating with radicalized Islamist organizations (including AQ affiliates) in order to stage attacks against the U.S. and its interests.

  7. #407
    Guru
    Skateguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston/Heights
    Last Seen
    02-07-12 @ 08:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,571

    Re: Leaked footage from Apache showing "US military slaughter" in Baghdad

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    It became our business after Saddam's numerous acts of war which he perpetrated against the U.S.. It became our business after Saddam started recruiting from and cooperating with radicalized Islamist organizations (including AQ affiliates) in order to stage attacks against the U.S. and its interests.
    Ah, ain't he like dead and stuff?
    "Don't be particular bout nothin, but the company you keep"

  8. #408
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Past the edge of the universe, through the singularity, and out the other side.
    Last Seen
    09-01-10 @ 05:23 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,324

    Re: Leaked footage from Apache showing "US military slaughter" in Baghdad

    Quote Originally Posted by Skateguy View Post
    Ah, ain't he like dead and stuff?
    Ah, like in the words of Colin Powell: "you break it you buy it."

  9. #409
    King of Videos
    dirtpoorchris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    WA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:30 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,008

    Re: Leaked footage from Apache showing "US military slaughter" in Baghdad

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    Ah, like in the words of Colin Powell: "you break it you buy it."
    We aren't talking about nice porclin here. Or even expensive electronics. We are talking about people here. You shouldn't break and then buy people.
    I'm Finding it Harder to be a Gentleman, White Stripes ~ "You think I care about me and only me. When every girl needs help climbing up a tree."

  10. #410
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Past the edge of the universe, through the singularity, and out the other side.
    Last Seen
    09-01-10 @ 05:23 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,324

    Re: Leaked footage from Apache showing "US military slaughter" in Baghdad

    Quote Originally Posted by dirtpoorchris View Post
    We aren't talking about nice porclin here. Or even expensive electronics. We are talking about people here. You shouldn't break and then buy people.
    We're talking about a country here, you can't go in, take down their government, hurt infrastructure, etc and then just leave without leaving them with stability in your wake.

Page 41 of 45 FirstFirst ... 313940414243 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •