Hunt them all- More out there from other Wars that commited crimes against humanity.

[gerryh]

No I posted in anger- Still the truth Buck.

and still not willing to answer the questions. Looks to me like you find the "discussion" just fine and dandy as long as it stays to your narrow view, but immediately ignore or find offense if it is broadened out to include more than just the the german Armed Forces of WWII and present day 3rd world thugs. Your automatic "american hater" label when ever anyone questions the americans or points a finger at the americans, glaringly shows YOUR bias.

 

[Goober]

and still not willing to answer the questions. Looks to me like you find the "discussion" just fine and dandy as long as it stays to your narrow view, but immediately ignore or find offense if it is broadened out to include more than just the the german Armed Forces of WWII and present day 3rd world thugs. Your automatic "american hater" label when ever anyone questions the americans or points a finger at the americans, glaringly shows YOUR bias.

No bias- I have stated the US did commit War Crimes-
You focus is only the US.
Read my posts.

Google

Oh Im fine with charging this guy and anyone guilty of committing these acts. I just find it odd to expect powers to follow all of these rules during war. Even the allies at times let the laws slide from time to time but did not charge any of their own people with war crimes. I don't like the idea of 'victors justice.' Both sides should be held accountable, not just the losers.

International law is also meaningless if no one is going to enforce them. If what is said about chemical weapons being used in Syria is true and the international community does nothing - then that law means nothing. Just as it meant nothing when Iraq and Iran were at war. No one was ever held accountable for those incidents.

Bump

Still comes down to the former SS member did nothing wrong. He summarily executed a "non combatant". The "non combatant" falls under the laws of the detaining country.

Bump - No issue with summary ececution? No trial, no whatever, just shoot the man. Why that logic is well.............

 

[gerryh]

No bias- I have stated the US did commit War Crimes-
You focus is only the US.
Read my posts.

I've read your posts.....

"yup, the americans did war crimes...but....look at this guy".....


A whole lot of "look over there"


and great, another link to the ICC and war crimes tribunal. I want to know why the americans and their allies have gotten a pass for almost 70 years.


and btw, bumping an american and his excuses does nothing.

 

[Goober]

Well you and Gerry have a hard on for the US regardless of what they do.

The issue if you look into it was after WW2 no one really wanted to do a freaking thing. Cold War Politics, scientists, add the Gestapo and SS were incorporated and used by both sides.- West - USSR.
Germany did next to nothing. Throwing roadblocks up.

It has to change.
Look to the Sudan- North - Indicted for War Crimes and travels freely thru Arab Countries.

JURIST - Paper Chase: ICC urges Nigeria to arrest Sudan president for war crimes

Kenya and the international court: It’s show time | The Economist

Bump

 

[gerryh]

Bump - No issue with summary ececution? No trial, no whatever, just shoot the man. Why that logic is well.............

If the americans can do it, and get away with it, why not anyone else? At least it wasn't a 2 year old.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

I've read your posts.....

"yup, the americans did war crimes...but....look at this guy".....


A whole lot of "look over there"


and great, another link to the ICC and war crimes tribunal. I want to know why the americans and their allies have gotten a pass for almost 70 years.


and btw, bumping an american and his excuses does nothing.

Well, in the case of the ICC, it's because we're not signatory.

In the "70-year pass" it's because ain't nobody big enough and tough enough to arrest us. Or to be willing to try.

 

[JLM]

No bias- I have stated the US did commit War Crimes-
You focus is only the US.
Read my posts.

Google



Bump



Bump - No issue with summary ececution? No trial, no whatever, just shoot the man. Why that logic is well.............

Yeah, it gets a little much, to listen to some folks you'd get the impression Obama and Bush are in the same league as Idi Amin! -

 

[gerryh]

Well, in the case of the ICC, it's because we're not signatory.

In the "70-year pass" it's because ain't nobody big enough and tough enough to arrest us. Or to be willing to try.

and there we have it. This makes the whole thing a joke.

Yeah, it gets a little much, to listen to some folks you'd get the impression Obama and Bush are in the same league as Idi Amin! -

Did I mention obama and bush? I've mentioned MY Lai, comparing with the OP.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

and there we have it. This makes the whole thing a joke.

Only if your point of view is "If we can't arrest all murderers, we won't arrest any murderers."

 

[JLM]

Did I mention obama and bush? I've mentioned MY Lai, comparing with the OP.

I wasn't thinking of you specifically, the entire sentiment has been discussed at length for several years, S.J.P. being as much of a culprit as anyone! (I think he still takes peeks at the forum)

 

[gerryh]

Only if your point of view is "If we can't arrest all murderers, we won't arrest any murderers."

why arrest and charge one 90 year old man for a murder that they can't even prove he pulled the trigger. All they need to prove is that he was there. Why not arrest those that you CAN prove they did pulled the trigger. multiple times. with no regard for age or gender.

 

[Goober]

and there we have it. This makes the whole thing a joke.




Did I mention obama and bush? I've mentioned MY Lai, comparing with the OP.

Well you have to start somewhere. Do you prefer no action taken?

 

[JLM]

Well you have to start somewhere. Do you prefer no action taken?

Chemical warfare is a good place to start and Obama is ready to do something about it. As far as William Calley is concerned that is old history and he was already tried and convicted once. I think the actual time he served is reprehensible, but there's thousands of old cases like that. Let's start with the sh*t happening today and put an end to it. I hate to think of "collateral damage", but that is going to happen regardless.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

why arrest and charge one 90 year old man for a murder that they can't even prove he pulled the trigger. All they need to prove is that he was there. Why not arrest those that you CAN prove they did pulled the trigger. multiple times. with no regard for age or gender.

I'll pretend your question is serious. The reason is that he was part of an organised, designed plan that killed approximately six million mostly white people in a short space of time.

It was the organisation and planning that gives it its special horror.

Oh, and it was the Americans' fault. But we can't get them coz they're mostly dead.

 

[JLM]

Oh, and it was the Americans' fault. But we can't get them coz they're mostly dead.

The Americans never even got into the war until 1942.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

The Americans never even got into the war until 1942.

See? I told you it was their fault!

 

[Goober]

During WW2 the Allies had confirmation of the Extermination Camps. Was it a War crime not to bomb these camps?

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

During WW2 the Allies had confirmation of the Extermination Camps. Was it a War crime not to bomb these camps?

For the Americans, yes.

 

[WLDB]

and great, another link to the ICC and war crimes tribunal. I want to know why the americans and their allies have gotten a pass for almost 70 years.

As would I. A crime is a crime regardless of who did it or which side they were on. Saying the other guys did it too or did much worse is not a valid defence or excuse. Every now and then they do a little show to show some sort of token responsibility but nothing real. Look at the way Mai Lai was handled. Some people were charged and found guilty but got a slap on the wrist for a massacre.

During WW2 the Allies had confirmation of the Extermination Camps. Was it a War crime not to bomb these camps?

From what Ive read a lot of the prisoners were hoping the camps would be bombed. Even if it killed a lot of them it would have given some of them a chance to escape or fight back.

why arrest and charge one 90 year old man for a murder that they can't even prove he pulled the trigger. All they need to prove is that he was there. Why not arrest those that you CAN prove they did pulled the trigger. multiple times. with no regard for age or gender.

Who knows if they can or not? Thats what a trial is for. If they cant he is found not guilty and released. That is the way the system works.

I hate to think of "collateral damage", but that is going to happen regardless.

Just like there will always be a crime rate in every country. Just because it will likely always be there doesnt mean people should do nothing about it.

 

[JLM]

From what Ive read a lot of the prisoners were hoping the camps would be bombed. Even if it killed a lot of them it would have given some of them a chance to escape or fight back.

That sentence says a lot and puts a realistic perspective on things!