rwieder 0 #101 March 29, 2007 The UK just confirmed that they were in fact in Iranian waters at the time that Iran said they were like 8/10ths of a mile. Blair has just sent a second letter to the Iranian Parliment DEMANDING the release of their personal. That oughta do it!@$*& That said, this stupid fu*k in Iran is just itching to blow something up. We need to stop focusing on Iraq (We will never win that one anyway) and start watching North korea & Iran along with Syria. What would happen if Putin decided to join forces with Iran & North Korea - Germany - France etc... Donald Trump said it best on his interview with Pat O'Brain. When asked "If you were President, what would you do right now?" Trump responded: "I'd pull out everything, leave and claim victory, just like we did in Naam" I like that idea. That would be some ugly circumstances. I know GHWB has made a mess of things, but if i had my way i'd make him stay in office until he fixed this situation. I voted for him, and Dick Cheney (Ducking, and running away) and i'd do it again. But their "Cow Boy" mentality has sure got us in some fu*ked up situation(s) Bush & Cheney are both idiots and will never get anything done now that the house is outnumbered by the Democrats, and theses folks want answers, and they want them NOW. I really don't know which party is worse. I think Aggie Dave should run for President. (He'd Win!) Hell, i don't think there's anybody on this site that could put us in a worse position than we already are. I do know American's are the most hated people in the world, i know, i've looked them in the eyes. It's unnerving to think that someone could hate us that much. "Can't we all just get along?" Rodney King I don't know what's fixing to happen, but none of it can be a good thing for anyone. I doubt seriously we will ever look back on theses days that started with the ill fated plan of 3 days of "Shock & Awe" well, i'm shocked, but i've yet to be in awe. I'll never forget when the pres landed on the US Abraham Lincoln and claimed victory and said "The major battle has been won" I bet that will haunt him the rest of his life, it will be on his mind on his death bed as he draws his final breath. Poor fella, he has no idea. God Help Us. God Be With Our Commander(s) & Chief(s). And Please God, be with our troops, all of them, from each and every country. These are prophetic days.-Richard- "You're Holding The Rope And I'm Taking The Fall" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rwieder 0 #102 March 29, 2007 QuoteWhat about Iraq? Didn't the former leader get a lot of support... not recently but at one time? We, the USA sure did. When we decided we could trust him (Hussien) to do our evil bidding to keep Iran in check. Sadaam used the very weapons we gave him to contol the Iranians to gas the Kurds. How smart are we now? Oh, hindsight is 20/20 isn't it? We should have minded our own business instead of being the nation's policeman.-Richard- "You're Holding The Rope And I'm Taking The Fall" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IanHarrop 41 #103 March 29, 2007 QuoteQuoteWhat about Iraq? Didn't the former leader get a lot of support... not recently but at one time? We, the USA sure did. When we decided we could trust him (Hussien) to do our evil bidding to keep Iran in check. Sadaam used the very weapons we gave him to contol the Iranians to gas the Kurds. How smart are we now? Oh, hindsight is 20/20 isn't it? We should have minded our own business instead of being the nation's policeman. "...keep Iran in check..." was that after their US supported dictator was kicked out? Just checking....."Where troubles melt like lemon drops, away above the chimney tops, that's where you'll find me" Dorothy Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rwieder 0 #104 March 29, 2007 Quotewas that after their US supported dictator was kicked out? Just checking..... That is correct. If you remember the Ayotolla sp? Homanie sp? was a crazy SOB.-Richard- "You're Holding The Rope And I'm Taking The Fall" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DZJ 0 #105 March 29, 2007 QuoteThe UK just confirmed that they were in fact in Iranian waters at the time that Iran said they were like 8/10ths of a mile. Source please. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zipp0 1 #106 March 29, 2007 QuoteQuotewas that after their US supported dictator was kicked out? Just checking..... That is correct. If you remember the Ayotolla sp? Homanie sp? was a crazy SOB. But the "Ayatollah Assahollah" T-shirts were sweet. -------------------------- Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zipp0 1 #107 March 29, 2007 QuoteThe UK just confirmed that they were in fact in Iranian waters at the time that Iran said they were like 8/10ths of a mile. Where are you getting that information? I see it reported nowhere. -------------------------- Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rwieder 0 #108 March 29, 2007 I'm getting it off of CNN Live. They're covering a ton of world events right now. The story right now is "Parents who control their autistic child with an electric cattle prod" No joke. They just went to commercial, which i have muted just in case the "Head On" thing comes on again! I'm starting to think they sensationolize the news just to keep you glued to their channel.-Richard- "You're Holding The Rope And I'm Taking The Fall" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michele 1 #109 March 29, 2007 Richard, I'd love to see the source, too...I've just done a quick check and can't find it anywhere. Perhaps you meant Iraqi waters...? Just heard something about them being in Iranian waters according to the Iranian government, but that's completely denied by Blair et al. The parading of the UK soldiers in front of tv is a direct violation of the Geneva conventions. The kidnapping violates the UN, if I'm not mistaken. Apparently there's a mob calling for the immediate death of the sailors, too. God help the Iranians should any harm come to those 15. Achmedinijad will not back down; and Khomeni, who I believe can "fire" Khomeni, is the one behind the kidnapping and holding of the sailors, if I understand the government correctly - the same Grand Mullah that recently said "sure, use a nuke for defense; it's all right...". The Saudis have cancelled a dinner with the WH in mid April. Israel has put everyone on a high alert status. Chlorine bombs in Iraq. A recent statement (from earlier this month, iirc) stating that Iran will kidnap blue eyed blonds and "feed them to the roosters" (or something along those lines). Passover starts shortly. After passover ends, on April 10, here is what I expect if the sailors haven't been returned: a combined UK/US rescue of those 15, with some serious firepower from the carrier groups. Israel will join and bomb the nuclear facilities. Syria will join in, as they have an alliance with Iran. Not sure about Lebanon and Egypt. The Kurds will have opportunity to go after some unresolved land dispute, and Turkey will retaliate. And it will spread from there... Dire? Sure. But this really has the potential to get very ugly very, very fast...and very big very fast. I hope I'm wrong - and there's a big part of me that thinks I am - but there's the other side of me that thinks this is the match to the powderkeg...and once ignition starts, all bets are off. Sigh. Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rwieder 0 #110 March 29, 2007 QuoteDire? Sure. But this really has the potential to get very ugly very, very fast...and very big very fast. I hope I'm wrong Your not wrong. Quoteand there's a big part of me that thinks I am - but there's the other side of me that thinks this is the match to the powderkeg...and once ignition starts, all bets are off. As soon as GWB cons Tony Blair into going into Iran and rescueing the 15 sailors it will immediately change the complexion of the world as we know it. I fear it will change to biblical proportions. The proverbial "Gloves" are already off. As i said in an earlier posts, i've been getting the information from CNN Live, channel # 202 on my DTV. They haven't said much about it the last 30 minutes or so, it's amber alerts and cattle prods right now, i'm sure they'll get to it again.-Richard- "You're Holding The Rope And I'm Taking The Fall" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lindsey 0 #111 March 29, 2007 Granted we should be concerned about how our actions affect others. I don't think that we shouldn't. But at some point people in these other countries you're talking about will have to step up and be responsible for themselves rather than blaming the bad ol' USA for all their woes. I'm by no means a fan of many of our foreign policies. But ya' know, world oppression isn't our problem to solve at the exclusion of our own best interests. It would be nice if the evil dictators of the world didn't exist....but we didn't create these people, and we didn't subjugate their masses.-- A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #112 March 29, 2007 Quote The parading of the UK soldiers in front of tv is a direct violation of the Geneva conventions. Can you elaborate on this part? That thought hadn't occurred to me. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 1 #113 March 29, 2007 Quote"Exactly. He means they were French. " Could you elaborate that ? http://als.lib.wi.us/Bart%20Simpson.jpg Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rwieder 0 #114 March 29, 2007 QuoteCan you elaborate on this part? That thought hadn't occurred to me. The Geneva Convention Here This should answer all of your questions.-Richard- "You're Holding The Rope And I'm Taking The Fall" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dorbie 0 #115 March 29, 2007 More exploitation of the hostages: http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1258274,00.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #116 March 29, 2007 QuoteQuoteCan you elaborate on this part? That thought hadn't occurred to me. The Geneva Convention Here This should answer all of your questions. I guess my impression was that the Geneva Conventions wouldn't be applicable until Iran becomes a party to the armed conflict. That was just a first pass thought, and I don't really have time to study up on it...I could absolutely be wrong. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #117 March 29, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteI'm not sure what you're arguing. I didn't say the Iranians were justified in taking those hostages, I merely said they had a compelling reason. Those words are merely a shade of grey apart, if even that. What I think you're trying to suggest is the difference in frames of reference. The reasons were compelling to them, but not to us. But if that's the argument, it's as someone so nicely put, a point without a point. Manson had compelling reasons to kill people too. Did you read the very next sentence in my post (immediately after that part you quoted)? Yes, but it wasn't terribly necessary to include. Murder is an illegal killing. But there are many compelling and legal reasons to kill. So that's just another muddled field where we can be wishy washy and say 'everyone is right.' Bullshit. Iran is wrong. If the UK, the US, or Israel bloodies them up as a result, they have only themselves to blame for it. It should be noted that Iran is profiting greatly from the mess they've created. Up until the point where serious damage is done, they benefit from instability in the middle east. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyD 0 #118 March 29, 2007 QuoteQuote The parading of the UK soldiers in front of tv is a direct violation of the Geneva conventions. Can you elaborate on this part? That thought hadn't occurred to me. Blues, Dave The US and its little brother are in no position to be parading around the Geneva Conventions after we publicly stated that we weren't going to follow them. I think the guy who said that is in the news right now also. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michele 1 #119 March 30, 2007 QuoteI guess my impression was that the Geneva Conventions wouldn't be applicable until Iran becomes a party to the armed conflict. I think it applies because the UK is a party to an armed conflict, and this is a kidnapping of service personnel. I believe that is how it applies, considering that the UK is there as a party to an on-going armed conflict, as well as being in internatinal waters; the kidnapping could easily be construed as an overt act of war. I am absolutely NO expert, and will be happy to learn more even if I'm wrong; and granted, I'm wrung right now, just finishing a brutal day in class (two exams, and I am sooooooooo frustrated...but I digress...), so my brain is having an attitude and not recalling things readily right now. I might well be wrong... But that is how I've understood it to be applied. There is something there about UN peacekeeping rules too, being in international waters. I think. I'm muddled. I need dinner, a good stiff bottle of vodka, and a good night's sleep. Maybe I'll be able to think better tomorrow and give you a better answer, but for now, that's my understanding. Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dorbie 0 #120 March 30, 2007 This is the illegal kidnapping of British forces personnel from Iraqi sovreign territory where they had a right to be. They are now hostages with demands being issued to secure the release of one hostage. They are paraded on television and coerced into making written statements against British government policy and in favor of Iran's goals. Meantime consular access is denied. Maybe this heinous action is impressive in the Middle East and with Iran's idiotic apologists here, but it is reprehensible behavior of the lowest kind. This ongoing disgrace constitutes an act of war. This conduct is inexcusable and reprehensible as is making excuses for it and promulgating a series of shifting lies in its defense. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chris74 0 #121 March 30, 2007 Ah , You like pictures, I have one too ! Try to understand the message . Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #122 March 30, 2007 (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyD 0 #123 March 30, 2007 QuoteQuoteI guess my impression was that the Geneva Conventions wouldn't be applicable until Iran becomes a party to the armed conflict. I think it applies because the UK is a party to an armed conflict, and this is a kidnapping of service personnel. I believe that is how it applies, considering that the UK is there as a party to an on-going armed conflict, as well as being in internatinal waters; the kidnapping could easily be construed as an overt act of war. Here is something for you to consider: QuoteBy Jan. 25, 2002, according to a memo obtained by NEWSWEEK, it was clear that Bush had already decided that the Geneva Conventions did not apply at all, either to the Taliban or Al Qaeda. In the memo, which was written to Bush by Gonzales, the White House legal counsel told the president that Powell had "requested that you reconsider that decision." Gonzales then laid out startlingly broad arguments that anticipated any objections to the conduct of U.S. soldiers or CIA interrogators in the future. "As you have said, the war against terrorism is a new kind of war," Gonzales wrote to Bush. "The nature of the new war places a —high premium on other factors, such as the ability to quickly obtain information from captured terrorists and their sponsors in order to avoid further atrocities against American civilians." Gonzales concluded in stark terms: "In my judgment, this new paradigm renders obsolete Geneva's strict limitations on questioning of enemy prisoners and renders quaint some of its provisions." Gonzales also argued that dropping Geneva would allow the president to "preserve his flexibility" in the war on terror. His reasoning? That U.S. officials might otherwise be subject to war-crimes prosecutions under the Geneva Conventions. Gonzales said he feared "prosecutors and independent counsels who may in the future decide to pursue unwarranted charges" based on a 1996 U.S. law that bars "war crimes," which were defined to include "any grave breach" of the Geneva Conventions. As to arguments that U.S. soldiers might suffer abuses themselves if Washington did not observe the conventions, Gonzales argued wishfully to Bush that "your policy of providing humane treatment to enemy detainees gives us the credibility to insist on like treatment for our soldiers." When Powell read the Gonzales memo, he "hit the roof," says a State source. Desperately seeking to change Bush's mind, Powell fired off his own blistering response the next day, Jan. 26, and sought an immediate meeting with the president. The proposed anti-Geneva Convention declaration, he warned, "will reverse over a century of U.S. policy and practice" and have "a high cost in terms of negative international reaction." You can't honestly expect someone to extend you a courtesy that you have obviously not extended to them. I realize this is US and not UK, but the UK was the number 2 in the whole fuck up and they have had their own prisoner torture issues. Unfortunately, the shoe is now on the other foot. Thankfully, it is just a handful of men/woman and not tens of thousands. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dorbie 0 #124 March 30, 2007 They aren't POWs there is as yet no war, but that's where this is headed. They are captured armed forces personnel in uniform. All your pseudo sophistry and phony moral equivalency is just so much bullshit. Where prisoner abuses have occurred they have made shocking headline news and have been prosecuted. They are not systematic abuses perpetuated by the leaders of government and justified by their diplomats and other apologists. The central issue of applicability of the the Geneva Convention is the status of illegal combatants. America would be well within it's rights to execute illegal combatants on the battlefield under the Geneva Convention, it does not. These personnel are UK armed forces members captured illegally. they were in uniform under their national flag, and they have been subjected to absolutely despicable exploitation intentionally and calculatedly by the Iranian government. Shifting ransom demands are being made and disgustingly people here still think it's great sport to excuse the crime. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #125 March 30, 2007 QuoteAmerica would be well within it's rights to execute illegal combatants on the battlefield Where's that? Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
This Site Is For Sale
