|
-
March 11th, 2004, 04:53 PM
#16
Registered User
 Originally Posted by Cleetus
I'd lock them in a room with Trip and Julieon
Once again I apologies on behalf of all Canadians for Julieon the meat puppet.
I don't think that terrorists follow the Geneva Convention. So why should we when dealing with them. Where in the Geneva Convention does it say you may kill thousands of innocent people and expect to be treated with kid gloves? I'm tired of this nice guy crap I think dead is too good for these people drowned them in pigs blood then they know there going to hell.
If I was the judge I would convict him ask him to step up to the bench slap him on the hand a say "BAD" don't do that again. And let that be his punishment.
I'm not Satan ... I'm just one of his highly placed minions 
-
March 11th, 2004, 05:06 PM
#17
 Originally Posted by Escape_Driver
Once again I apologies on behalf of all Canadians for Julieon the meat puppet.
I don't think that terrorists follow the Geneva Convention. So why should we when dealing with them. Where in the Geneva Convention does it say you may kill thousands of innocent people and expect to be treated with kid gloves? I'm tired of this nice guy crap I think dead is too good for these people drowned them in pigs blood then they know there going to hell.
If I was the judge I would convict him ask him to step up to the bench slap him on the hand a say "BAD" don't do that again. And let that be his punishment.
There is a big stipulation throughout the Geneva Conventions that seems to indicate that the laws and customs of war must be followed if you want to benefit from their protection. Car bombing civilians is not an allowed form of war.
-
March 11th, 2004, 05:19 PM
#18
Registered User
The Security Force have and will use all nessecary force to prevent the infringment of borders and endangerment of their citizens using prevemptive means where posssible including the capture,detaining and interigation of suspected "enemies of the state" to gain intellegence in this aim.
This said one mans terrorist is anothers freedom fighter.
-
March 11th, 2004, 07:49 PM
#19
 Originally Posted by Archer
This said one mans terrorist is anothers freedom fighter.
Bull**** and bull**** again. I happen to be against abortion as a contraceptive, but I don't consider clinic bombers heros or freedom fighters. They are terrorists and murders. If your aim is to kill unarmed civilians to make a point, you are a terrorist. You attack military targets, fine, thats a guerilla, freedom fighter, whatever. Moral relativistic bull****.
-
March 11th, 2004, 08:45 PM
#20
Registered User
I was pointing out the viewpoint of a.n.other person.
The word terrorist is an easy label to give to someone who disagees with ones perspective i.e. the Afghan freedom fighters backed by the CIA were terrorists in the Russians eyes
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|
Bookmarks