Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Anti War Protests
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="canon" data-source="post: 169897" data-attributes="member: 8423"><p>The 4982nd meeting was the official transfer of power to Iraq. You noticed it said "by removing the label of occupation", maybe you'd care to explain what that means. According to the Meeting, this was done to "<em>deprive the terrorists and anti-democratic forces of a rallying point to foment violence in our country</em>". Setting up the government happened faster than training an army for that government to command, but both fall under international law as being a necessary component of the occupying force. We removed their government and ability to defend or themselves, it is our duty to restore that. Our obligation was then, and still is, <em>restoring and ensuring</em> the safety of Iraqi civilians until such a time as the Iraqi security force can accomplish the task. We just saw British troops leaving and a battalion of Iraqi military come under sole command of Iraqi officials. I'll let you answer your own question as to whether or not conditions have changed.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>If you scroll back, we've already addressed the issue of ad hominem and attacking the source of the statement. My current job does not prevent me from researching nor making true statements. I think you already knew that, but wanted to test the waters. They're a bit deeper than you thought.</p><p></p><p>And while manning a machine gun does not make me a Middle Eastern expert, I never said it did. From your first post you suggested I'm clueless to both international law and middle eastern <em>culture</em>. Manning a machine gun in a middle eastern country for six months lends a bit more weight to the topic. Your "authority" to judge my knowledge as to what I know about middle eastern culture comes from what? Reading internet articles? Gee, I only have first hand experience.</p><p></p><p>As for international law? I don't need to be an "expert" on the subject to be able to read the interpretations and judgements from those who ARE experts to know what they're saying.</p><p></p><p></p><p>From the generals in the field to the commander in chief.. we conquered Iraq and became their government and security. Replacement of one is finished, the other is in progress. If they said tomorrow that Iraq is fully ready, I'd be the first to celebrate. But until that time, we have a job to do protecting the people we rendered defensless.</p><p></p><p><span style="font-size: 9px">Source: Globalization and Autonomy</span></p><p></p><p><em>Respecting their lives</em> doesn't mean wiping out their government and military then leaving them to deal with the ensuing civil war or plundering from other nations. As I've stated, my "understanding" of international law is on par with organizations such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Crimes of War Project and the UN itself. If you have a problem with how <em>they</em> are interpreting international law, send them an email and tell them some truck driver sent you.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="canon, post: 169897, member: 8423"] The 4982nd meeting was the official transfer of power to Iraq. You noticed it said "by removing the label of occupation", maybe you'd care to explain what that means. According to the Meeting, this was done to "[I]deprive the terrorists and anti-democratic forces of a rallying point to foment violence in our country[/I]". Setting up the government happened faster than training an army for that government to command, but both fall under international law as being a necessary component of the occupying force. We removed their government and ability to defend or themselves, it is our duty to restore that. Our obligation was then, and still is, [I]restoring and ensuring[/I] the safety of Iraqi civilians until such a time as the Iraqi security force can accomplish the task. We just saw British troops leaving and a battalion of Iraqi military come under sole command of Iraqi officials. I'll let you answer your own question as to whether or not conditions have changed. If you scroll back, we've already addressed the issue of ad hominem and attacking the source of the statement. My current job does not prevent me from researching nor making true statements. I think you already knew that, but wanted to test the waters. They're a bit deeper than you thought. And while manning a machine gun does not make me a Middle Eastern expert, I never said it did. From your first post you suggested I'm clueless to both international law and middle eastern [I]culture[/I]. Manning a machine gun in a middle eastern country for six months lends a bit more weight to the topic. Your "authority" to judge my knowledge as to what I know about middle eastern culture comes from what? Reading internet articles? Gee, I only have first hand experience. As for international law? I don't need to be an "expert" on the subject to be able to read the interpretations and judgements from those who ARE experts to know what they're saying. From the generals in the field to the commander in chief.. we conquered Iraq and became their government and security. Replacement of one is finished, the other is in progress. If they said tomorrow that Iraq is fully ready, I'd be the first to celebrate. But until that time, we have a job to do protecting the people we rendered defensless. [SIZE=1]Source: Globalization and Autonomy[/SIZE] [I]Respecting their lives[/I] doesn't mean wiping out their government and military then leaving them to deal with the ensuing civil war or plundering from other nations. As I've stated, my "understanding" of international law is on par with organizations such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Crimes of War Project and the UN itself. If you have a problem with how [I]they[/I] are interpreting international law, send them an email and tell them some truck driver sent you. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Anti War Protests
Top