Advertisement
by Vassenor » Tue Jan 07, 2020 1:12 pm
by San Lumen » Tue Jan 07, 2020 1:13 pm
Vassenor wrote:SECDEF has said that the US Military will not commit war crimes for Trump, including bombing Iranian cultural sites.
So how long until he gets fired?
by Eitoan » Tue Jan 07, 2020 1:21 pm
San Lumen wrote:Vassenor wrote:SECDEF has said that the US Military will not commit war crimes for Trump, including bombing Iranian cultural sites.
So how long until he gets fired?
Nice to hear him standing up to Trump and that illegal orders would be refused on his watch.
by San Lumen » Tue Jan 07, 2020 1:23 pm
by Gormwood » Tue Jan 07, 2020 1:36 pm
by Vassenor » Tue Jan 07, 2020 1:39 pm
by New Paine » Tue Jan 07, 2020 1:40 pm
by Fahran » Tue Jan 07, 2020 1:45 pm
New Paine wrote:Gormwood wrote:Stephen Miller is supposedly Jewish even though his own relatives called him out for the detention scheme.
Stephen Miller is a self-loathing Jew and a tool for the alt-right, and you know what, I think he gets a jolly over being used as tool, and yes I mean in a masochistic way.
by Eitoan » Tue Jan 07, 2020 2:24 pm
San Lumen wrote:Eitoan wrote:
Who determines the legality of the orders? Need all orders coming from the President undergo review? For all Presidents or only Donald Trump?
There is something called international law and the rules of war. Attacking cultural sites violates that. The military is under no obligation to blindly follow a unconstitutional or illegal order.
When you say all Presidents do you mean a special case for him under US law or the world? I can't speak for the rest of the world but international law applies to all countries
by Vassenor » Tue Jan 07, 2020 2:26 pm
Eitoan wrote:San Lumen wrote:
There is something called international law and the rules of war. Attacking cultural sites violates that. The military is under no obligation to blindly follow a unconstitutional or illegal order.
When you say all Presidents do you mean a special case for him under US law or the world? I can't speak for the rest of the world but international law applies to all countries
I mean a special case for him under US law.
Are the orders of other Presidents that are viewed as illegal to be ignored, or only Trump? And by what judicial authority in the United States? Are all his orders to be litigated? Those of other Presidents? Who has standing to determine this in the field? All combatants wearing the uniform of the United States? Officers only? Senior officers?
by Telconi » Tue Jan 07, 2020 9:59 pm
San Lumen wrote:Eitoan wrote:
Who determines the legality of the orders? Need all orders coming from the President undergo review? For all Presidents or only Donald Trump?
There is something called international law and the rules of war. Attacking cultural sites violates that. The military is under no obligation to blindly follow a unconstitutional or illegal order.
When you say all Presidents do you mean a special case for him under US law or the world? I can't speak for the rest of the world but international law applies to all countries
by Nobel Hobos 2 » Wed Jan 08, 2020 12:24 am
by Washington Resistance Army » Wed Jan 08, 2020 12:28 am
San Lumen wrote:Eitoan wrote:
Who determines the legality of the orders? Need all orders coming from the President undergo review? For all Presidents or only Donald Trump?
There is something called international law and the rules of war. Attacking cultural sites violates that. The military is under no obligation to blindly follow a unconstitutional or illegal order.
When you say all Presidents do you mean a special case for him under US law or the world? I can't speak for the rest of the world but international law applies to all countries
by Loben The 2nd » Wed Jan 08, 2020 1:09 am
Nobel Hobos 2 wrote:I will note just now that officers in the US military have taken an oath to obey the President and the US Constitution.
But not international law, Geneva convention or any such.
As to war crimes, see Exceptionalism, US.
by Telconi » Wed Jan 08, 2020 1:19 am
Nobel Hobos 2 wrote:I will note just now that officers in the US military have taken an oath to obey the President and the US Constitution.
But not international law, Geneva convention or any such.
As to war crimes, see Exceptionalism, US.
by Nobel Hobos 2 » Wed Jan 08, 2020 1:28 am
Telconi wrote:Nobel Hobos 2 wrote:I will note just now that officers in the US military have taken an oath to obey the President and the US Constitution.
But not international law, Geneva convention or any such.
As to war crimes, see Exceptionalism, US.
And Soviet exceptionalism, and Afghani exceptionalism, and North Korean exceptionalism, and... wait, none of this works...
by Nobel Hobos 2 » Wed Jan 08, 2020 1:34 am
by Kowani » Wed Jan 08, 2020 1:42 am
Nobel Hobos 2 wrote:I will note just now that officers in the US military have taken an oath to obey the President and the US Constitution.
But not international law, Geneva convention or any such.
As to war crimes, see Exceptionalism, US.
by Nobel Hobos 2 » Wed Jan 08, 2020 1:45 am
by Loben The 2nd » Wed Jan 08, 2020 1:46 am
Nobel Hobos 2 wrote:As time passes I have a dimmer and dimmer view of President Obama. But it's not for the usual "didn't do enough" reason, it's for the war crime he committed.
The CIA under Obama infiltrated the compound where they knew OBL was living. They did this with a CIA agent impersonating a nurse giving vaccinations. The cover story was well supported with other nurses giving vaccinations in the area. They were fake vaccinations but that's not even the point. They got strategic information by impersonating a charitable medical organization.
The only way that's not a violation of the Geneva convention is to claim that the immunity for medical services only applies to the literal Red Cross.
by Nobel Hobos 2 » Wed Jan 08, 2020 1:49 am
Loben The 2nd wrote:Nobel Hobos 2 wrote:As time passes I have a dimmer and dimmer view of President Obama. But it's not for the usual "didn't do enough" reason, it's for the war crime he committed.
The CIA under Obama infiltrated the compound where they knew OBL was living. They did this with a CIA agent impersonating a nurse giving vaccinations. The cover story was well supported with other nurses giving vaccinations in the area. They were fake vaccinations but that's not even the point. They got strategic information by impersonating a charitable medical organization.
The only way that's not a violation of the Geneva convention is to claim that the immunity for medical services only applies to the literal Red Cross.
does the Geneva convention apply to terrorists?
by Loben The 2nd » Wed Jan 08, 2020 1:51 am
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Ancientania, Cerespasia, Cerula, Cyptopir, Elejamie
Advertisement