Agendas

Former Member · April 2003

There is in fact no end of countries that will not arrest wanted criminals. Take Sharon: not only he's not arrested and sent to Belgium for trial but he's allowed to be the head of state in Israel. Britain itself allowed one of the most brutal murderers of the 20th century, General Pinochet, to be sent home instead of extraditing him to Spain.

Instead of name-dropping and diverting attention it's about time you faced that your country has probably been in liaison with more terrorists, thugs, butchers and other scum than any other country in recent history. You were saying yesterday that your position in the US army does not allow you to criticise your own government. Perhaps it's time now for a dignified silence on this issue, eh?

Former Member · April 2003

Originally posted by Aladdin
Instead of name-dropping and diverting attention it's about time you faced that your country has probably been in liaison with more terrorists, thugs, butchers and other scum than any other country in recent history. You were saying yesterday that your position in the US army does not allow you to criticise your own government. Perhaps it's time now for a dignified silence on this issue, eh?

(In a tory MP in the Commons kind of way) Hear, Hear!

Former Member · April 2003

Sharon was tried. In Israel. Belgium has no right to try him.

You love to make accusations, but as usual, you don't bother to actually understand what it is you are talking about.

Former Member · April 2003

Originally posted by Greenhat
That's called "transference". Attempting to put your values and reasoning on someone from another culture. It doesn't work.

So when are the 'coalition' going to pull out of Iraq?

Former Member · April 2003

Originally posted by Uncle Joe
So when are the 'coalition' going to pull out of Iraq?

Soon enough.

Former Member · April 2003

Originally posted by Greenhat
Sharon was tried. In Israel. Belgium has no right to try him.

You love to make accusations, but as usual, you don't bother to actually understand what it is you are talking about.

Stop defaming us for one moment and if you really don't think we understand then EXPLAIN.

Oh, and if it was the War crimes tribunal then they do have a right to try him if he committed war crimes. Are you saying that you support Dubya and Slobodans view that it is a pointless court?

Former Member · May 2003

Originally posted by Simbelyne

Oh, and if it was the War crimes tribunal then they do have a right to try him if he committed war crimes. Are you saying that you support Dubya and Slobodans view that it is a pointless court?

Explain how a Belgium court has any right to try anyone except those who commit a crime in Belgium?

War Crime tribunals are set up by those involved in order to try those accused. Nuremberg is one example. The Japanese courts another.

THe ICC is not. And the ICC specifically claims to be only applicable for crimes that the accused is not tried for otherwise. Sharon has already been tried.

But Brits will soon see how smart agreeing to the ICC was. There is a case being prepared against the UK troops in Iraq for warcrimes. Silliness in extreme, but really, why be surprised?

Former Member · May 2003

Originally posted by Uncle Joe
So when are the 'coalition' going to pull out of Iraq?

The only place where similar action has been taken, was Germany 1945, and again after the fall of the Berlin Wall. In obth of those historical moments, Germany had to rebuild their nation. From scratch. With little or no Govt in place.

Perhaps, as South Africa did in the 90s, Iraq can learn from Germany.

Perhaps too, the "get the troops out" brigade can too.

Agendas

Comments