[brite750]

Originally Posted by Fidelista

The Geneva convention 'is' an attempt ---not 'was' an attempt, and if a farce, only because there are those who resist it. They are , by agreed norms--criminals.
The last part of your post sounds like you believe that any behavior is ok, as long as you believe it furthers your cause---thats interesting.
I assume beheadings--torture of civilians---rape--and car-bombings---aircraft flown into civilian buildings?---"you do what you need to do to win because they may do it to you"?. I think you need to examine what you are saying. I do agree with statement "there is no nobility in war" ---BUT there is nobility in the majority of our people and our soldiers who fight the wars.
This has to be preserved , the best way we can.>f

I dont really give a crap what you think it sounds like, the Geneva convention is a joke. It is only abided by if one side is trying to get something from the other side, a bargaining chip if you will. Civilians have always been a target in war, when you win on the battle field you rape a piliage those who have supported your enemy, name a war, any war where that did not happen, cruise liners were sunk in both WWI and II, towns bombed and burned to the ground in the cival war, both World wars, korea, Viet Nam, it's only an atrocity if its being done to you. As you say, i'm sure to the islamofasist's that beheadings, car bombings, etc, are perfectly exceptable. they can not win against the US using conventional warfare and that is why they hide behide woman and children in their mosques. I think it is you who need to examine why it is that you can't face up to the horrors of war, the ultimate inhumanity to man, when you don't go into war to win, you won't. Your cause has to be something that you will sacrafice anything to achieve, otherwise your enemy will use you timidity against you at every turn, as we have witnessed in every war in recorded history including the current one in Iraq. the question becomes is the war in iraq striking a blow against our eneimies, those that would have an end to western civilization, or at least an end to the US, to them we are the enemy and they will do anything to kill as many of US as possible, they have made the commitment, have we? I think not, so you can go on and on about your little war atrocities in Viet Nam and point your little fingers and wringe your little hands, but I'm afraid ultimately it will not matter to those who are trying to cause us harm, you will die at their hand as well.

[bassetman]

Originally Posted by Chicon

Atrocities in a war are unavoidable as war is atrocity in itself. And that atrocity starts at the moment the idea of innocent persons may be harmed for whatever purpose is a part of a large concensus that leads to the use of violence.
And 'violence completes partial mind'.

Good to see you Chicon!

I find it interesting that only three people, so far, have had comments to make. Are we the only ones facing reality and moving on

I was afraid to see all the right wing denial that I thought would show up here!

PS I guess I should have real "all" the posts before I assumed none of the denial had showed up yet!

[brite750]

Lets take this one point at a time:

<<The Geneva Convention 'is' an attempt ---not 'was' an attempt, and if a farce, only because there are those who resist it.>>

It is still a farce by any name you want to use; your enemy will wave papers in front of your face and condemn you if you strike at him


<<They are, by agreed norms--criminals.>>

It seems to me that the winners of any war get to decide who the criminals are, check out the Nuremberg trials some time


<<The last part of your post sounds like you believe that any behavior is ok, as long as you believe it furthers your cause---that’s interesting.>>

I made no indication of anything being ok or not, I am simply stating what is reality, something you lefties have a real problem with, you like to deal with things in the theoretical realm, that’s what makes you dangerous in dangerous times. You spend all your time whining, and not enough time making the tough decisions that have to made in a war, indecisiveness kills, as sure as a bullet in the brain.

<<I assume beheadings--torture of civilians---rape--and car-bombings---aircraft flown into civilian buildings?---"you do what you need to do to win because they may do it to you"?.>>

There is no “May” about, they have done those things, what are you going to do about, call a lawyer??

<<I think you need to examine what you are saying. I do agree with statement "there is no nobility in war" ---BUT there is nobility in the majority of our people and our soldiers who fight the wars.>>

No I think you need to examine what I’m saying, I already know, I said it. We may see them as noble, but the vets I’ve talked to see it as survival, the “bad guys” are killing you and the people that are in your fox hole, so you fight back with ever fiber of your being, I’ve never heard one solider refer to himself as noble, that’s carp. Can they be fighting for a cause that in our opinion is noble??, maybe, but they do not refer to themselves as noble.

<<This has to be preserved, the best way we can.>f>>

Keep in mind that all the appeasers in history were wrong, and ultimately caused horrendous misery and death by their actions. Wars are fought and won by causing more death and misery to the other guy than he is inflicting on you until your remove his will to fight, period. You don’t win wars with treaties, agreements and other worthless pieces of paper.

[Aaron.W]

The Geneva Convention is a potent psychological weapon. That's how we present it
to all of our recruits before we even let them wear green jammies in the daytime. ;]

It has been our experience that enemy soldiers are far more likely to surrender to our
forces than any other because we have a strong reputation for abiding by it and
prosecuting our own when they break ranks. The fact that we tend to kick *** due to
strong training and imaginative tactics thought up on the spot tends to motivate them
to accept our kind hospitality as well.

Our action in disbanding the First Airborne Regiment for the actions of a few in Somalia
and the subsequent attempt at a coverup by it's officers is unique in the memories of
potential adversaries all over the world. If the americans have ever punished their own
so strictly, it has slipped our collective memories.

My Lai is a shining example, but it is that of individuals at the scene who acted on
their own conscience and initiative when faced by the crime of a single officer and his
men. Canada acted as a nation and is given full credit as a nation, no matter which
political party was in power at the time.

Ladies and Gentlemen, that is the power of the Geneva Convention. If the americans
as a nation learn to wield it as we have, they will find it far heavier and potent a
blade than it appears when hanging on a wall gathering dust
under the care of rear-echelon lawyers and politicians.

[Infidel_Kastro]

Originally Posted by linskyjack

Once again IF is making no sense. The war crimes of Vietnam are clearly documented---recently in fact the Tiger Brigade has come under investigation. The fact remains that at the time Kerry was demonstrating against the war, there were many men coming forward with horrific stories about US atrocities. You can try to ignore it, but this country has had some pretty horrible moments in its history. If you choose to live in your fantasy world fine.... but remember you were not there and YOU have no idea of what you are talking about.

Once again, did Mr. Kerry witness any war crimes himself? Was he reporting what others had told him without any investigation or proof? In court, its called hearsay, and is given very little if any relevance.
I can guess that there have been crimes committed in any war, but without ANY proof, I am only making an accusation.
And its IK, not IF.

[GoneForNow]

Originally Posted by linskyjack

Its hard for the right wingers in this forum to accept the fact that Vietnam wasn't a noble undertaking. Therefore I doubt you will get many comments.

This is what I find humorous. I was unaware that anyone had to respond to any thread at any time. Frankly, some of the threads here are just so stupid that to post in them is to waste what little valuable time we have on this earth. The title enough was warning that stupidity would reign supreme. A quick review of the posts only confirmed the obvious.

So why did I post now? I saw that IK (not IF) had posted. A man of common sense and uncommon intelligence. His posts confirmed both assessments. The other posts only served to confirm my suspicions.

[Mulderator]

Originally Posted by gbrumb

I saw that IK (not IF) had posted. A man of common sense and uncommon intelligence.

There is so little of that in this forum.

[GoneForNow]

Originally Posted by Mulder

There is so little of that in this forum.

Yes, I think back to the days of mole, Bryan, Rollin Rog even DN, when he posted more often. Each had differing opinions, strongly held but articulated in a coherent, aggressive but respectful manner. I recall the old expression of separating the wheat from the chaff, seems now we have much more chaff then wheat. Or in the vernacular more akin to the level of intelligence now prevalent here....fluff over stuff.

[Fidelista]

Originally Posted by brite750

Lets take this one point at a time:

<<The Geneva Convention 'is' an attempt ---not 'was' an attempt, and if a farce, only because there are those who resist it.>>

It is still a farce by any name you want to use; your enemy will wave papers in front of your face and condemn you if you strike at him


<<They are, by agreed norms--criminals.>>

It seems to me that the winners of any war get to decide who the criminals are, check out the Nuremberg trials some time


<<The last part of your post sounds like you believe that any behavior is ok, as long as you believe it furthers your cause---that’s interesting.>>

I made no indication of anything being ok or not, I am simply stating what is reality, something you lefties have a real problem with, you like to deal with things in the theoretical realm, that’s what makes you dangerous in dangerous times. You spend all your time whining, and not enough time making the tough decisions that have to made in a war, indecisiveness kills, as sure as a bullet in the brain.

<<I assume beheadings--torture of civilians---rape--and car-bombings---aircraft flown into civilian buildings?---"you do what you need to do to win because they may do it to you"?.>>

There is no “May” about, they have done those things, what are you going to do about, call a lawyer??

<<I think you need to examine what you are saying. I do agree with statement "there is no nobility in war" ---BUT there is nobility in the majority of our people and our soldiers who fight the wars.>>

No I think you need to examine what I’m saying, I already know, I said it. We may see them as noble, but the vets I’ve talked to see it as survival, the “bad guys” are killing you and the people that are in your fox hole, so you fight back with ever fiber of your being, I’ve never heard one solider refer to himself as noble, that’s carp. Can they be fighting for a cause that in our opinion is noble??, maybe, but they do not refer to themselves as noble.

<<This has to be preserved, the best way we can.>f>>

Keep in mind that all the appeasers in history were wrong, and ultimately caused horrendous misery and death by their actions. Wars are fought and won by causing more death and misery to the other guy than he is inflicting on you until your remove his will to fight, period. You don’t win wars with treaties, agreements and other worthless pieces of paper.

Well , first off, I want to make it clear that my response had nothing to do with Presidential elections.
As to your post--- I thought about responding item by item---but I am sure I would accomplish nothing.
You have made some good points, ones that trouble me--one, that the winner of conflicts tend to ignore their crimes, you are correct in that.
But the most troubling thing to me is the notion of 'giving up' on rules of war, ie--sinking to the level of animals.
War is crime, so you don't have to point that out---I am a realist {I hope} and understand that it is unavoidable, but I think you misunderstand me.
I am not for appeasement on the battle fields or ham-stringing military operations so that U.S. soldiers are endangered--- I want to make that clear.
And no--I don't think we should deal with war criminals by 'calling a lawyer'---possibly a undertaker would be more appropiate??. I am a leftist--not a pacifist. I resent be called an appeaser because because I recognize the Geneva conventions as a good thing---or human decency--when and where you find it.
You say that inflicting death and misery are what wins wars? I agree to a degree---but what could inflict misery is --Rape the women---kill the children--kill all that surrender---mutilatate prisoners ect--ect.
This is what I am talking about, do you want your fellow countrymen to ingage in this? or condone it? . That is what the conventions are about---whether they are effective enough or not.
I strongly disagree we you about nobility in war.
When soldiers take disarmed enemy as prisoner---and do not butcher them--there is nobility in that.
When wounded enemy are medically treated---there is nobility in that.
When soldieirs sacifice for their fellows---there is noblity in that.
I could go on.
Maybe we should throw away all human compassion--- laws of conduct --and just cause the most misery---but I will never agree! .
It seems to me that you have given up the struggle to rise above some human behavior that is all to common in world--and condemned.
I suggest you take a more positive attitude.
And GB---nobody ask you to repond to a "stupid thread".
The thread was started by someone that wanted to exchange info---you have a problem with that?? >f

[poochee]

Why do some people post to threads that are beneath them?? I am amused.

[Fidelista]

Originally Posted by poochee

Why do some people post to threads that are beneath them?? I am amused.

Poochee, you say so much, with so few words!
Because you posted, I responded, and as a result---looked into things more closely and learned things---always a good thing!.
You see, there are some right wing intellectuals here that know everything already and resent us common folks exchanging ideas or questions>>>>>>>>>>>.


"some of the threads here are just so stupid that to post in them is to waste what little valuable time we have on this earth. The title enough was warning that stupidity would reign supreme"
_______________________________________________________________
I assure you, your post was not stupid!!!.
I have have seldom heard any questions posed here --as stupid---and you have not disappointed!
I am not a good debator---good with language--or good with communication skills---or even a good typer---but I am not stupid, but slightly vunerable.
It would be nice to be an all-knowing intellectual ---would it not!!
Then you could post to threads "beneath" you, and make it known!
Glad to know you poochee>f

[poochee]

Intellectuals don't think "in the box". The ones I am aquainted with are open to discussion whether or not they agree with you. Fidelista, you are just fine.

[bobol]

Originally Posted by brite750

when you don't go into war to win, you won't.

Win at what cost?..... That's why sometimes the political leash is needed on frothing rabid generals [ie, nuke proposals in the Korean War] . Leaders in a 'civilised' nation gone off to war, convince their constituents the opponents are the brutes to be tamed - overkill to overwhelm the opponent smashes that notion. Hard to imagine how anyone riteous will initially go off to war knowing they'll be involved in a slaughter if the "winning at any cost" strategy would be used. In the goofy movie 'Troy', Achilles states "imagine a King fighting his own battles, wouldn't that be a sight!"..... why the common person allows themselves to be convinced war is acceptable is a tragic folly. In a way the Geneva Convention does legitimise warfare.

[Wino]

Originally Posted by poochee

Why do some people post to threads that are beneath them?? I am amused.

So they can remind us of their superiority.

[poochee]

I aim to please!!