It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Have some friggin sense to distiguish between those that issue the orders, those that have to follow them, and those that have been forced to stay at war against their will....And those that sit on the sidelines gasping, and choking back tears with every atrocity. Again I say, the constitution is not thy enemy. Look to those who willfully defy it for that. Get a grip, man.
Originally posted by Indigo_Child
A solider has the right to disobey any inconstitutional, unlawful, or morally wrong orders.
I have not seen the video in question here, but I have seen other evidences that point to what your hinting at. The military may have had good intentions going into Iraq, but the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
You will find that even staunch Liberals like myself cant blame the soldiers for thier actions. The soldiers are only following orders. The soldiers are doing the job they signed up for. Where you disgust and anger should be directed towards is the leadership of this country that is asking these kids to do the things they are doing. Most of them are kids. 19,20 years old for the most part.
dont know if you are old enough to remember Vietnam. If not, you shold do some research on it. The soldiers at that time were asked to do truly horrible things in the name of democracy.
The beauty of the US is that we regularly shed our leadership in the hopes of improving ourselves. We don�t always succeed (Dubya) but he too, will eventually be replaced.
Originally posted by Indigo_Child
you can call Iraqi's terrorists, or even muslims terrorists. I should be able to call a Nazi a Nazi.
Your army men are Nazi's. They are brutal, evil, wicked and sick psychopaths, that are slaughtering innocent men, women, children and eldery, in their hundreds, millions and thousands.
I have taken it upon myself to fight for reason, for humanity, for sense, for the oppressed, and for those Iraqi's. [/quiote]
And what are ya going to do about? Bitch, moan and lie on an internet web forum? "You go girl"
As it seems to me, nobody else here, wants too. These topics are ignored, instead people, would rather show their hate for the "Iraqi terrorists" for daring to fight against oppression and evil.
Don't you have an integrity, shame?
Are you goinng to anything about it?
Don't you learn from the past?
How is it for you, that pregnant women walking about, can be shot down under suspicion of concealing a bomb?
These are all facts, and anyone who challenges me on this, is setting themselves up for embarrassmant.
Did you not know that Hitler did exactly the same that is happening in your America today.
What's happening in America? Are you so blind to see, it's EXACTLY the same?
then I am going to blacklist you as one of those who is beyond any hope at all, and wish you best of luck in being cannon fodder.
Originally posted by Kidfinger
Originally posted by Indigo_Child
A solider has the right to disobey any inconstitutional, unlawful, or morally wrong orders.
This tells me you have never been in military service before. Yes, the law says you dont have to follow an unlawful order. Military law says you WILL follow ALL ordes given, wether you agree with them or not. When you are in the military, your not really a person anymore, your property. A number.
Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Indigo, in theory you are partly correct. It IS wrong to commit murder on an unarmed man not threatening you, wrong morally. However, it is much more complicated than that.
Once you are thrust into that situation, with orders from the President to carry out acts of war against a nation, you either follow orders or can be tried for disobeying. If your commanders TELL you to go in and shoot everything that moves, because the situation has deterioted to that point, you don't HAVE much of a choice. It is WAR.
It cannot be deemed unconstitutional, unfortunately, because that situation is still an ongoing debate. It is unclear whether the President can initiate acts of war such as this legally, and many lawyers will argue that he can, because he is, by definition of the constitution, in control of the armed forces. Presidents for years have used that legal loophole to initiate military action without the consent of congress, and with no formal declaration of war. They even turn a blind eye to the War Powers Act.
So what are you asking for Indigo? You want all the E-1's to turn around and shoot their superiors? These people trust that their commanders are doing the right thing. The commanders trust that the President is doing the right thing. Is the President doing the right thing?
Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Indigo, in theory you are partly correct. It IS wrong to commit murder on an unarmed man not threatening you, wrong morally. However, it is much more complicated than that. Once you are thrust into that situation, with orders from the President to carry out acts of war against a nation, you either follow orders or can be tried for disobeying. If your commanders TELL you to go in and shoot everything that moves, because the situation has deterioted to that point, you don't HAVE much of a choice. It is WAR.
It cannot be deemed unconstitutional, unfortunately, because that situation is still an ongoing debate. It is unclear whether the President can initiate acts of war such as this legally, and many lawyers will argue that he can, because he is, by definition of the constitution, in control of the armed forces. Presidents for years have used that legal loophole to initiate military action without the consent of congress, and with no formal declaration of war. They even turn a blind eye to the War Powers Act.
So what are you asking for Indigo? You want all the E-1's to turn around and shoot their superiors? These people trust that their commanders are doing the right thing. The commanders trust that the President is doing the right thing. Is the President doing the right thing?
2. WHAT IS GENOCIDE?
Genocide is foremost an international crime for which individuals, no matter how high in authority, may be indicted, tried, and punished by the International Criminal Court (ICC). According to Article 6 of the ICC Statute, This crime involves, "any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."
The crime of genocide has two elements: intent and action. �Intentional� means purposeful. Intent can be proven directly from statements or orders. But more often, it must be inferred from a systematic pattern of coordinated acts.
Intent is different from motive. Whatever may be the motive for the crime (land expropriation, national security, territorrial integrity, etc.), if the perpetrators commit acts intended to destroy a group, even part of a group, it is genocide.
The phrase "in whole or in part" is important. Perpetrators need not intend to destroy the entire group. Destruction of only part of a group (such as its educated members, or members living in one region) is also genocide. Most authorities require intent to destroy a substantial number of group members � mass murder. But an individual criminal may be guilty of genocide even if he kills only one person, so long as he knew he was participating in a larger plan to destroy the group.
Originally posted by Off_The_Street
killak420 says:
"Dude be mindful of what you say. They have certain laws in place in which they can arrest you for saying what you just said."
No, you are incorrect. Even a complete twit can insult Americans, falsely accuse the government of genocide, and call anyone who disagrees with her silly and naive views as being a "nazi", and in general make a complete fool of herself, and she can get away with it.
The only recourse we have to such fatuosity is the permanent "ignore" option, which, upon reflection, seems like a great idea.