American could be charged with treason

[M.O.B.E]

This story is crazy. It's officially out of hand now. Buckle up.

[Birdy]

I don't think we should let how we feel about the US and their 'war on terror', our anti-Americanism, our anti-Imperialism, etc. muddy up the truth. Sure no treason charges have been laid since WWII, but really there hasn't been a point in recent history where America itself has come under such direct threat (real direct threat, not cold war, secret memo, is it real or is it not kind of threat).

if this guy is found guilty, i'm all for whatever punishment they want to serve up to him. terrorists, whether you sympathize with them or not, are nothing but cold blooded mass murderers. and i'm all for rehabilitation, but when it comes to these guys, i say bring back public hangings.

[Dr_Evil_Mouse]

if this guy is found guilty, i'm all for whatever punishment they want to serve up to him.

Got any thoughts on Dietrich Bonhoeffer ? He went that one step further than desertion, didn't he? Still, it took until the 1990s for the German government to pardon him, because they'd executed him under the laws of the time. Hey, so too was Jesus, I suppose.

I'd hate to think there's a blanket ethic for resisting your government when you believe they're up to no good. The US has only stoked terrorism by invading Iraq; they had no good purpose there, and that's become public knowledge.

Lastly, and this is maybe redundant, the term "terrorism" can become meaningless quickly. Remember that Einstein called certain prominent founders of Israel terrorists, for the nature of their actions. If someone invades your country, on the other hand, and you take up arms to defend it, what does that make you?

At worst, I can see locking the guy up - that's what you sign on to when you join the army - but kill him?!

[Dr_Evil_Mouse]

Oh, wait, I should have read the story first - I thought this was the guy who is being deported from Canada for desertion. Never mind.

[Dr_Evil_Mouse]

Boy is my face red .

[djmelbatoast]

Do you feel the same way about a general who goes through all the correct channels and bueracracy before blowing up a building full of innocent people and small children?

Not to excuse this guy. It just sounds an aweful lot like what the english said about guerrilla warfare during the American Revolution. "It's just not civilized."

[Birdy]

Boy is my face red .

teehee..

Do you feel the same way about a general who goes through all the correct channels and bueracracy before blowing up a building full of innocent people and small children?

preemptively? absolutely.

and really, terrorist activity isn't civilized, nor is war itself. nothing about murdering innocent people could ever be.

[Dr_Evil_Mouse]

And who's to judge innocence and guilt?

Oops, sorry, I'm forgetting the bumper sticker - "Kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out!"

Ever see Cup Final?

[djmelbatoast]

The idea of preemptive is interesting, if you consider the whole idea of exceptable levels of colateral damage.

And I'm not trying to say anything about this mess is civilized, in fact the opposite, I'm just trying to say that they are killing innocents just like NATO and America.

Why is it that if a solider throws a granade at an other soldier that is exceptable warfare but if a guy blows himself up in an attempt to kill a soldier he is a coward and a terrorist?

[Birdy]

And who's to judge innocence and guilt?

the million dollar question!

i think the world and time and karmic influences really have a major hand in these things.. look at hitler, he killed himself.

and if that isn't enough..

God sort 'em out

really... and i'm not even really a subscriber. i've always thought that when one dies and their very last breath escapes them, judgement in some form or another by something or another comes. or at least i hope it does.

[Dr_Evil_Mouse]

I'm confused by your willingness to accept a metaphysical principle like karma but not one like theism. I don't buy either, fwiw.

[Birdy]

The idea of preemptive is interesting, if you consider the whole idea of exceptable levels of colateral damage.

And I'm not trying to say anything about this mess is civilized, in fact the opposite, I'm just trying to say that they are killing innocents just like NATO and America.

Why is it that if a solider throws a granade at an other soldier that is exceptable warfare but if a guy blows himself up in an attempt to kill a soldier he is a coward and a terrorist?

war sucks. all sides are murderers.

but there is a difference between one who intentionally and preemptively murders innocent people, and one whose victims are termed "casualties of war". in this specific case, if found guilty, this particular American falls into the former of the two categories.

and i'm not saying Americans or Nato itself isn't capable of falling into that former category either. they are.. but we don't have that link at the top of this page, we have this one... we're talking about this guy.

Edited October 11, 2006 by Guest
somethings just don't need to be said.

[Birdy]

I'm confused by your willingness to accept a metaphysical principle like karma but not one like theism. I don't buy either, fwiw.

i wouldn't say that i'm atheist by any means... i've definately pondered the stars too many nights to rule out anything by definate means... what i meant earlier was that I don't necessarily subscribe to any particular religion, ie... Jesus Christ died on the stake and three days later rose again... but i do believe in a supreme being(s)... whatever that or they may be.

[djmelbatoast]

[quote name=Birdy

but there is a difference between one who intentionally and preemptively murders innocent people' date=' and one whose victims are termed "casualties of war".

The terms "casulties of war" and collateral damage are different.

Collateral damage refers to an estimated number of non-military people who are going to be killed in an operation.

So, the general says, "THere may be up to two hundred people in that building who have nothing to do with this but I think that there is probably 2 thousand 'bad guys' in there too. Therefore if I kill everyone inside with a bomb I have done more harm than good."

I don't really see how this differs greatly from what suicide bombers are trying to achomplish.

[Birdy]

yah i see what you're saying...

i guess i'm just trying to draw distinction between say a world trade center attack, where the objective is to kill nothing but innocent people, vs. the innocent people who are killed as "casualties of war"... in terms of collateral damage, you're right, there isn't much difference... but in terms of intent, there's a world.

[guigsy]

Birdy, are you saying the WTC attacks were preemptive and the War on Terror (in Iraq) is an "actual war"?

im basing this on your distinction of casualties and innocents dying, from your previous couple posts.

wasn't Iraq, or The War on Terror, marketed as a preemptive strike against the terrorists? preemptive war.

am i crazy to think that the WTC attacks were more a reaction to American hegemony in the region and less about "hating our freedom"?

[Birdy]

not saying that at all, actually.

just trying to differentiate objectives of war.

[guigsy]

but there is a difference between one who intentionally and preemptively murders innocent people, and one whose victims are termed "casualties of war".

i guess i'm just trying to draw distinction between say a world trade center attack, where the objective is to kill nothing but innocent people, vs. the innocent people who are killed as "casualties of war"...

ok. just checking.

[Birdy]

truth is i've never thought about it all in this context... so no, i really wasn't saying that.

but now that i actually HAVE given it some thought though... i'm inclined to possibly think that the terrorist attacks on the wtc were preemptive... considering that al-qaeda is not the national army to any nation, it can't be argued that they are retaliating for US presence overseas, and secondly, al-qaeda is an entity in itself, just as any country could be, and thirdly, an objective was in mind when committing the act - to create fear. right at this exact moment i can't really think how it wasn't preemptive...

(mind you, i may change my mind later... this really is the first time i've ever thought about it and may not have worked it all out.)

and no, i don't think the war on terror is actually a war. the US hitting Iraq was preemptive. They're not fighting al-qaeda over there... regardless of what they want to tell us.

Edited October 12, 2006 by Guest
going through the degrees

[The Chameleon]

I don't think we should let how we feel about the US and their 'war on terror', our anti-Americanism, our anti-Imperialism, etc. muddy up the truth. Sure no treason charges have been laid since WWII, but really there hasn't been a point in recent history where America itself has come under such direct threat (real direct threat, not cold war, secret memo, is it real or is it not kind of threat).

if this guy is found guilty, i'm all for whatever punishment they want to serve up to him. terrorists, whether you sympathize with them or not, are nothing but cold blooded mass murderers. and i'm all for rehabilitation, but when it comes to these guys, i say bring back public hangings.

Really! You're all for killing people? WOW.

Eye for an eye leaves everyone blind. As far as we know this guy may have said a lot, but we have no proof he even killed anyone!

So basically you're advocating death for speaking upopular speech against America.

Insane.

[Birdy]

EASY there chameleon!

you and I can't speak to what he is guilty of or isn't, EXACTLY why i used the word "IF".

and if this man truly is guilty of helping al-qaeda kill the gross number of innocent people that they have, his death wouldn't be anywhere near "an eye for an eye".

[The Chameleon]

Perhaps not eye for and eye. I guess I fall into the "captial punishment is never justified camp", hence the knee jerk reaction.

I just find those who advocate capital punishment very strange. I mean the idea that "you killed people and it's so wrong, we are going kill you", is ludacris and childish.

A far harsher punishment is imprisonment forever with no frills. Then the mind can eat itself. Death is too easy.

[Birdy]

i hear you.. under normal circumstances i'm not for capital punishment either.. this stuff just makes me so sick though.

i too am guilty of knee jerk reactions from time to time. i blame the irish in me.

[The Chameleon]

i hear you.. under normal circumstances i'm not for capital punishment either.. this stuff just makes me so sick though.

i too am guilty of knee jerk reactions from time to time. i blame the irish in me.

Agreed.

[M.O.B.E]

All I want to know is when is someone going to charge everyone in the US government with treason for misleading/mismanagement and lying to the American people. Thats treasonous. What ever happened to the term "responsible government". Yes it does also apply in the US Cogress and Senate.