Invading another country is an act of terrorism. Defending yourself from an invading force is called self defense. The kid was the soul survivor of a group that was bombed into oblivion. Everybody he knew there was dead and the soldiers were coming to kill him. He threw a grenade like anybody else in his position and a soldier of the invading force died. Who exactly are the terrorists here?
Omar Khadr- Where's the justice?
- Thread starter JLM
- Start date
- Status
Yes they did have justification! Didn't you read what I said? They were harboring(giving refuge) to a person we wanted to bring to justice or kill. I never said anything about the Taliban threatening us, they we're AIDING and EMBEDDING our enemy.
Of course not! We're the good guys! Why would we meet the demands of terrorists? Terrorist that brutalize its own people?
The minute you start playing with human rights, with conventions, with civil liberties, in order to say that you're doing it to protect yourself and you are going against those rights and conventions, you are no better than the guy who doesn't believe in them at all
Romeo Dallaire
'Child soldier' Khadr needs protection, Dallaire says - The Globe and Mail
Khadr was a 15 year old Canadian citizen when he was detained by the US. The Canadian government had an obligation to defend Khadr and ensure that he was treated humanely and in accordance with international laws, treaties and conventions, regardless of what he is alleged to have done.
As far as the allegations against Khadr are concerned, I doubt they would stand up in a court of law.
Evidence doctored to implicate Khadr: Lawyer
Evidence doctored to implicate Khadr: Lawyer - thestar.com
Good chance Khadr is only guilty of being the son of someone who supported al Qaeda and living in a compound attacked by the US. That so many Canadians would consider someone guilty without a fair and impartial trial is disgraceful.
According to international law the US had to request the Afghanistan government hand over people alleged to have committed crimes. But there is no legal basis for starting a war if that country refuses to hand over criminals. You would have a hard time finding any international law supporting your belief.
But lets assume you are correct. If the US can do this, then so can any country.
According to China, Canada is harboring a number of people accused of corruption by China. Applying the same principle, China would have the same right as the US to invade and occupy any country which refuses to hand over people they believe are criminals. Does that mean you support China invading and occupying Canada because they believe Canada is harboring criminals?
Oh excuse me, that's right, the principle of invading and occupying countries is only afforded to the good guys. China isn't a good guy so they don't have the same right to invade and occupy other nations as the US which is a good guy, even though their justifications for invading and occupying Iraq turned out to be completely bogus.
Another fundamental principle behind your logic is that good guys are always right and anyone who disagrees with good guys are are the bad guys and they are always wrong.
So how do you determine who is a good guy and who is a bad guy. Is it by hat color?
Good guys can detain people indefinitely without trial and torture them because of their goodness. Bad guys can't commit heinous acts like this as that would only confirm their badness. When the US tortures people or invades countries without provocation, it indicates their goodness. When other countries do exactly the same thing they are evil, unless they are the good guys, then its OK.
Last edited:
There are no good guys in war period. The problem the whole world is having is
that we try to fight surgical wars, frightened of public opinion and doing battle
with one hand tied behind the back. I have reached the point where I don't care
about who is wrong or right and any combination there of. While I do not
condone the war in Iraq, I do support our efforts in Afghanistan. I don't give a
hoot what or where the Taliban wanted to rule, they got what was coming to them. In most cases I do not support the American agenda but in this case I do.
that we try to fight surgical wars, frightened of public opinion and doing battle
with one hand tied behind the back. I have reached the point where I don't care
about who is wrong or right and any combination there of. While I do not
condone the war in Iraq, I do support our efforts in Afghanistan. I don't give a
hoot what or where the Taliban wanted to rule, they got what was coming to them. In most cases I do not support the American agenda but in this case I do.
I used to support the Afghan war because I believed that Canada was helping improve the lives of Afghans. But after our PM congratulated President Karzai on his fraudulent election win, I no longer support our involvement in that country.
Harper congratulates Karzai on controversial election win
Harper congratulates Karzai on controversial election win - thestar.com
We are only there to prop up a fraudulent pro-west government. Sorry that's not the mission I supported. I used to believe we were in Afghanistan to empower the Afghan people.
Harper congratulates Karzai on controversial election win
Harper congratulates Karzai on controversial election win - thestar.com
We are only there to prop up a fraudulent pro-west government. Sorry that's not the mission I supported. I used to believe we were in Afghanistan to empower the Afghan people.
Why?
What was our mission in Afghanistan? Did it include supporting a government which maintains power by election fraud? Are we there to ensure corrupt people get their bribes and kickbacks? Why are Canadians dying in Afghanistan?
Absolutely, it's just like when you were in school and you'd have a bunch of bullies always swarming around you and although you didn't really want to fight any of them, if once in awhile out of the blue you up and decked one, it helped to keep things peaceful for awhile after that and a few may even admire you as well as fear you.
There are Muslims in Canada who believe in Jihad against the West. They can have these views, but they have to keep these views to themselves. Or be deported if they express them openly or raise money for Jihad.
The Taliban, like the PLO, and Hamas have no fight with Canada, we should not be in Afhganistan. We are supporting the military-industrial complex with minimal payback. But that's our Lib-Cons mentality.
The Taliban, like the PLO, and Hamas have no fight with Canada, we should not be in Afhganistan. We are supporting the military-industrial complex with minimal payback. But that's our Lib-Cons mentality.
You can say all you want about Omar Khadr, he did take up arms against us and the bottom line is that he is lucky to be alive. He is now 21 and if treated as a minor at the trial he should be released with time served.
Like America is going to listen to some Canadian judges who seem to feel they have more power than they actually have.:roll:
I do not think that Khadr will be stepping on Canadian soil for a long, long time. If ever.
I do not think that Khadr will be stepping on Canadian soil for a long, long time. If ever.
Canadian law will have nothing to do with anything in this case. If he is convicted it will be under U.S. law, more specifically New York State law.
Which is why I stated that the Canadian Judges think they have more power than they actually have.;-)
I still say send him back to Canada. If he does go to trial he will be treated as a juvenial because he was 15 when captured. I am just guessing here but he may have the easiest time of all of the GITMO folks because he was 15.
I think him going back to Canada soon is a good possibility.
I think him going back to Canada soon is a good possibility.
It has to be a Federal Trial and that trumps state law. They could hold it in Montana if they wanted.
Omar isn't a citizen of Afghanistan. Who iss he to resist invaders in a country where he isn't a citizen?
Because they decided to try all of them in New York City where some of the finest lawyers in the world will defend them for free. (Columbia Law School, Fordum, City University School of Law, St, Johns. etc.) There will literally be hundreds of new law students wanting to make a name for themselves. In this case new will be good for them.
- Status