Your Bloody Soap Box · Public discussion

Rummy does it again!

Started by Wurm · · Last activity · 10 posts · 1,003 views

← Back to Your Bloody Soap Box

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

01 / Original postRummy does it again!Wurm · 18 Apr 2006 02 / This pagePosts 1–10Page 1 of 1 · chronological order 03 / Latest replyPost #10Wurm · 24 Apr 2006

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Your Bloody Soap Box
Published
18 April 2006
Last activity
24 April 2006
Original author
Wurm
Posts
10
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
1,003
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–10 of 10
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Original post
    Wurm
    Archived post
    #1

    HRW: Special Prosecutor Needed to Investigate Rumsfeld
    Human Rights Watch is calling for a special prosecutor to be appointed to investigate whether Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is criminally liable for the torture of a detainee at Guantanamo Bay. According to an Army Inspector General’s report obtained by the online magazine Salon.com, Rumsfeld was personally involved in the abusive interrogation of a Saudi man named Mohammad al-Qahtani. The report reveals Rumsfeld communicated weekly about the interrogation of Kahtani with Maj. Gen. Geoffrey Miller at Guantanamo. Joanne Mariner of Human Rights Watch said, “The question at this point is not whether Secretary Rumsfeld should resign, it’s whether he should be indicted.” Human Rights Watch maintains Rumsfeld could be liable under the legal principle that holds a superior responsible for crimes committed by his subordinates when he knew or should have known that crimes were being committed, but fails to stop them.

    Wesley Clark Becomes Seventh General Opposing Rumsfeld
    The report from Salon.com comes as Rumsfeld is facing a revolt from within the military. On Sunday Wesley Clark became at least the seventh retired general to call for Rumsfeld to step down.

    link

    So, what's it going to take for this man of "high caliber" to be bought down? Once again, Rumsfuck and BushCo have "shown their quaility" for all to see.

    This is the person in charge of defending the United States, AS WELL AS upholding all of the agreements and treaties that the U.S. is signatory to vis-a-vis military matters - such as the Geneva Conventions, the Nuremberg Principles, et al.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Nuremberg Principles

    Principle I

    Any person who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefore and liable to punishment.

    Principle II

    The fact that internal law does not impose a penalty for an act which constitutes a crime under international law does not relieve the person who committed the act from responsibility under international law.

    Principle III

    The fact that a person who committed an act which constitutes a crime under international law acted as Head of State or responsible government official does not relieve him from responsibility under international law.

    Principle IV

    The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him.

    Principle V

    Any person charged with a crime under international law has the right to a fair trial on the facts and law.

    Principle VI

    The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:

    (a) Crimes against peace: (i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances; (ii) Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i). (b) War Crimes: Violations of the laws or customs of war which include, but are not limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation of slave labor or for any other purpose of the civilian population of or in occupied territory; murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war or persons on the Seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity. (c) Crimes against humanity: Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhumane acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial, or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime.

    Principle VII

    Complicity in the commission of a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity as set forth in Principle VI is a crime under international law.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Now, does anyone here think Rumsfuck should be held to these standards as U.S. Secretary of Defense? If you don't, then this country has a very large problem on its hands.

    Report
  2. Hypnospin
    Archived post
    #2

    that these generals that have come forward makes for a significant event in that dissention in the ranks is one of the first signs of impending collapse of any chain of command.

    true, it is unlawful for any who are in still-enlisted or non-retired officer capacity to criticize the command, as a standing order, but those highly regarded well established generals (in military circles) who have come forward have much peer group credence to those who cannot even question any failings of authority publicly.

    some of what has been pointed out is not so much involving an anti-war stance, but the bringing of attention to they way war has been conducted.
    these generals perhaps hold themselves to standards of conduct that include respect for international law, as they should since us soldiers who served under their command were expected to be treated in wartime to these same principles by those nations with whom they engage in war.

    the primary job of any commander is see damage is inflicted against an enemy and upon the property of an enemy. the duty of a soldier is to carry out the tactics to meet these wartime needs. do not get me wrong, i am in no way in support of resorting to this premise, but this is the reality.

    to use the military to "fight a war against terrorism" is a fundamentaly flawed proposition when considered logically, just as much as to use the military to "promote democracy". commanders and soldiers need a leader and a people upon which to perfom the afformentioned military function.

    the generals who have spoken of their disagreement with the way things are being handled are not anti war per se, but anti misjudgement, anti poor communication, anti underestimation, anti lack of planning, anti inexperience,
    anti incompetence, anti arrogance, and, anti abuse to name a few gripes.

    they speak to those who are serving and who have served, creating the much feared (by those in power) breakdown in morale that is so necessary to induce change.

    Wurm said:


    Wesley Clark Becomes Seventh General Opposing Rumsfeld

    Nuremberg Principles

    Now, does anyone here think Rumsfuck should be held to these standards as U.S. Secretary of Defense? If you don't, then this country has a very large problem on its hands.

    Report
  3. Wurm
    Archived post
    #3
    Hypnospin said:

    some of what has been pointed out is not so much involving an anti-war stance, but the bringing of attention to they way war has been conducted.

    these generals perhaps hold themselves to standards of conduct that include respect for international law, as they should since us soldiers who served under their command were expected to be treated in wartime to these same principles by those nations with whom they engage in war.

    Certainly, these guys are not anti-war, since they've spent their entire working lives studying and prosecuting it in one way or another.

    What's clear is that the whole Iraq situation is untenable for the US, and I doubt there are many field-grade officers left that would honestly disagree.

    I've wondered what other capable US generals/admirals such as Arnold (before he turned coat), Eisenhower, Grant, Lee, Nimitz, Washington...would opine about the current "leadership" and Iraq conflict. Surely they would all decry the lack of military discipline and honor amongst the very top who are in power today.

    Report
  4. Hypnospin
    Archived post
    #4

    eisenhower was enduringly quotable, the lasting impact of many of his quotes would serve well to address the failings of the chickensh$t cabal that is passed off as leadership today.

    eisenhower spoke the following:

    "i hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who has seen it's brutality, it's futility, it's stupidity".

    "we want merely to live in peace with all the world, to trade with them, to commune with them, to learn from their culture as they may learn from ours, so that the products of our toil may be used for our schools and our roads and not for guns and planes and tanks and ships of war".

    "every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, represents, in the final analysis, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, who are cold and not clothed. this world in arms is not spending money alone. it is spending the sweat of it's laborers, the genius of it's scientists, the hopes of it's children".

    "a people that values it's priveleges above it's principles soon loses both".

    all the above: dwight d. eisenhower

    Wurm said:


    I've wondered what other capable US generals/admirals such as coat), Eisenhower, ...would opine about the current "leadership" and Iraq conflict. Surely they would all decry the lack of military discipline and honor amongst the very top who are in power today.

    Report
  5. stevebaby
    Archived post
    #5
    Hypnospin said:

    eisenhower was enduringly quotable, the lasting impact of many of his quotes would serve well to address the failings of the chickensh$t cabal that is passed off as leadership today.

    eisenhower spoke the following:

    "i hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who has seen it's brutality, it's futility, it's stupidity".

    "we want merely to live in peace with all the world, to trade with them, to commune with them, to learn from their culture as they may learn from ours, so that the products of our toil may be used for our schools and our roads and not for guns and planes and tanks and ships of war".

    "every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, represents, in the final analysis, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, who are cold and not clothed. this world in arms is not spending money alone. it is spending the sweat of it's laborers, the genius of it's scientists, the hopes of it's children".

    "a people that values it's priveleges above it's principles soon loses both".

    all the above: dwight d. eisenhower

    Thank you for some excellent quotes,of which I was previously unaware.
    If Eisenhower was alive to say that today he would of course be decried as a "commie" or a "liberal".Interesting ,is it not,to see just how far to the right the us has swung since Eisenhower's day?
    I do remember one of his most well-known quotes..."Beware the military/industrial complex." He seems to be that rare beast..an old-school republican with the gift of prescience,a bit of principle and some honesty.
    I bet ol' Dwight is turning in his grave at the antics of the criminals who currently occupy the white house.

    Report
  6. Wurm
    Archived post
    #6
    stevebaby said:


    I bet ol' Dwight is turning in his grave at the antics of the criminals who currently occupy the white house.

    Spinning vociferously, without a doubt. Ike would be that rarest of birds: a fairly "decent" Republican who actually accomplished great things for his country and its people.

    Whereas those who have come after - Nixon, Reagan, Wimpy & Chimpy - wouldn't rate a pimple on Ike's ass.

    Report
  7. limerickman
    Archived post
    #7

    The Sunday Times newspaper carried a story whereby the split between the US goverment and US Generals is at critical point.
    The generals are openly critical of the policies of the Bush goverment without reserve.

    Report
  8. stevebaby
    Archived post
    #8
    Wurm said:

    Spinning vociferously, without a doubt. Ike would be that rarest of birds: a fairly "decent" Republican who actually accomplished great things for his country and its people.

    Whereas those who have come after - Nixon, Reagan, Wimpy & Chimpy - wouldn't rate a pimple on Ike's ass.

    Here's another..http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smedley_Butler
    Smedley Butler - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Report
  9. stevebaby
    Archived post
    #9
    Hypnospin said:

    eisenhower was enduringly quotable, the lasting impact of many of his quotes would serve well to address the failings of the chickensh$t cabal that is passed off as leadership today.

    eisenhower spoke the following:

    "i hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who has seen it's brutality, it's futility, it's stupidity".

    "we want merely to live in peace with all the world, to trade with them, to commune with them, to learn from their culture as they may learn from ours, so that the products of our toil may be used for our schools and our roads and not for guns and planes and tanks and ships of war".

    "every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, represents, in the final analysis, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, who are cold and not clothed. this world in arms is not spending money alone. it is spending the sweat of it's laborers, the genius of it's scientists, the hopes of it's children".

    "a people that values it's priveleges above it's principles soon loses both".

    all the above: dwight d. eisenhower

    And a few more pertinent quotes.http://antiwar.com/quotes.php
    Quotes

    Report
  10. Wurm
    Archived post
    #10

    "Butler came forward to the U.S. Congress in 1934 to report that a proposed coup had been plotted by wealthy industrialists to overthrow the government of President Franklin D. Roosevelt."

    I would expect Prescott Bush to have been involved in that one somehow.

    Report

Keep exploring

Browse the sectionYour Bloody Soap Box Return to CyclingForumsStart at the home page Search discussionsFind another thread

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.