GWEEDO

Joined

• started 13 topics
• posted 226 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by GWEEDO

• 
  17

  Osama's Fate?

  by Englishman in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  if osama bin laden is captured and has to come to trial, what should his punishment be if he is found to be guilty of the murder of over five thousand people?.

  would europeans accept any us demands for execution?.

  this could get very complicated!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  GWEEDO

  To the Hague e-man

  Along with Milosevic

  Do you really think they'll get him alive?

  3 things the U.S. can do

  1.get him alive
  2.get him dead
  3.contain him

  I think 2 and 3 are the most realistic
• 
  8

  What Islamic Fundamentalists are really afraid of;

  by Abaddon in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  ... is women.

  (from the daily telegraph, a british national paper).

  in the next few days, our boys will be taking on the taliban, and we must all pray they succeed.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  GWEEDO

  Julie,

  You must be joking!!! Have you ever tried to reason with a fundamentalist?? Go have a conversation with Rex and get back to me.

  Evidence indeed. This is no court of law friend, this is the court of world opinion. Do you think the entire world is wrong and only the Taliban and bin Ladin are in the right?

  Who said anything about Osama being right? Well apparently Julie, a lot of people in this world think the U.S. should pursue every diplomatic option before bombs fall. Heres a little international LAW for you too:

  Bush's war plans likely to violate international law

  SIDDHARTH VARADARAJAN

  TIMES NEWS NETWORK
  
  EW DELHI: Though it is too early to predict the shape of Operation Infinite Justice, the US would probably be violating international law if it attacks Afghanistan or any other country.

  Article 2(4) of the UN Charter prohibits the use of force except in two circumstances. The first, where the UN Security Council authorises the use of force under Chapter VII of the Charter. And the second, where a country resorts to self-defence in the face of an armed attack.

  The UN Security Council has twice passed resolutions (1267 of 1998 and 1333 of 1999) calling on the Taliban to hand over Osama bin Laden to either a country where he has been indicted or to one where he will be brought to justice. Though these resolutions were passed under Chapter VII and impose sanctions on the Taliban, they do not authorise the use of force against the regime by any country.

  In the absence of a resolution specifically authorising force, the Taliban's refusal to hand over bin Laden cannot legally be construed as grounds for Washington to attack Afghanistan. Even if a UN mandate exists, it would be illegal to put civilians and civilian infrastructure in harm's way.

  What about self-defence? Though Article 51 of the UN Charter allows a country to defend itself against an armed attack, the US would have to conform to the International Court of Justice's landmark ruling on the scope of Article 51 contained in its Nicaragua judgment of 1986. The ICJ defined an armed attack as either an event in which one State directly sends troops into another or "the sending by or on behalf of a State of armed bands...which carry out acts of armed force against another State...(amounting to) actual armed attack by regular forces".

  The attacks in New York and Washington clearly constitute an act of armed force committed by armed bands. However, in order to justify attacking Afghanistan, the US would at the very least have to prove both that Bin Laden was responsible and that he acted 'on or behalf of" the Taliban government of Afghanistan.

  According to Prof Louis Henkin, one of the most distinguished US scholars of international law, the right of self-defence enshrined in Article 51 is "limited to cases of armed attack that are generally beyond doubt; a state's responsibility for acts of terrorism is rarely beyond doubt and difficult to prove...Article 51 gives a right...to defend against an armed attack. This right does not allow retaliation for armed attacks...or (force) to deter future attacks".

  That is why the US has held it would be illegal for India to attack terrorist camps in Pakistan or for Milosevic's Yugoslavia to have gone after KLA bases in northern Albania.

  Prof Henkin writes that "a state that has been the victim of an act of terrorism will have to pursue other remedies against states that it believes responsible and against the states that encourage, promote, condone, or tolerate terrorism or provide a haven to terrorists".

  So far, the US has not pursued other remedies. It has not moved the UN, nor has it responded to the Taliban statement that they would extradite bin Laden given proof of his involvement in last week's terrorist attacks. The Taliban may be bluffing, but international law requires the US to seek peaceful resolution of the crisis and not resort to the unilateral use of force.
• 
  17

  Hey, You Masters of War

  by TheOldHippie in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  in these days of the great cowboys preparing for the man-hunt, here are some lines telling what the mediterranean/european sentiments are, as published by a political commentator.

  i just quote them to show the us-europe gap:.

  un minuto de silencio... .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  GWEEDO

  yeru..

  This war will NOT be fought from 10,000 feet nor will it be seen on CNN.

  10,000ft...no kidding. But if you think there aint gunna be air strikes and some TV time your kidding yourself too. Either way, that wasn't my point so i'll move on.

  What should we do, so many have asked. We do what is necessary to eliminate terrorism

  Which is no answer at all. A nice little orwellism

  If we don't answer these people with the only language they understand, the next time it will be a nuclear bomb going off in NYC.

  I'm Glad your so sure you can eliminate terrorism with a gun...nice and surgical like, with a handful of special ops and no civilian deaths to count. Sounds too good to be true, why don't i buy it.

  I think your war on terrorism will only cause more 'blowback' --retaliation from terrorists.

  Englishman,

  Whats with vandalising the US flag there. I think the union jack is on enough flags these days aint it...
• 
  17

  Hey, You Masters of War

  by TheOldHippie in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  in these days of the great cowboys preparing for the man-hunt, here are some lines telling what the mediterranean/european sentiments are, as published by a political commentator.

  i just quote them to show the us-europe gap:.

  un minuto de silencio... .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  GWEEDO

  Larc,

  I think this will be a very well reasoned removal of the societal cancer that is terrorism.

  Well, I expect something to happen...whatever that will be, who knows. I'm really not for or against military action at the moment since there aint enough details floating around. But I am very sceptical that this war on terrorism will be won with bombs alone...Israel has never been able to eradicate it doing so. I've heard analysts say that this 'war' wont work unless the root causes are also addressed. One of the problems the US is dealing with is the extremist nature of some segements of the Islamic culture, and how can you deal with that. But these groups thrive on an under current of percieved injustice. The U.S. will have to address its Mid-east policies to win...But will it.

  Dropping bombs alone is only going to cause more 'blowback'
• 
  8

  What Islamic Fundamentalists are really afraid of;

  by Abaddon in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  ... is women.

  (from the daily telegraph, a british national paper).

  in the next few days, our boys will be taking on the taliban, and we must all pray they succeed.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  GWEEDO

  A request for evidence is unreasonable if it burns your sources

  Yeah, i know the reasoning here

  I just don't buy it totally. I'm sure they can aleast put something together. Pakistan thinks they can....they've seen the 98 dossier.

  but anyway..

  the UN and the NA to try to create a stable interim government

  I'm not sure if thats what they will do

  But theres a few problems here. I know The UN was talking to some deposed Afghani king from the 70's. The problem is when you overthrow the Taliban...you may well end up with all sorts of splinter groups and more unrest and civil conflict. The Taliban will still be round fighting a geurilla war too. Who is going to want to have peace keepers in that situation. I suspect not too many!
• 
  17

  Hey, You Masters of War

  by TheOldHippie in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  in these days of the great cowboys preparing for the man-hunt, here are some lines telling what the mediterranean/european sentiments are, as published by a political commentator.

  i just quote them to show the us-europe gap:.

  un minuto de silencio... .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  GWEEDO

  Jelly

  No Gweedo I never said that ‘wars just happen’. What I said is that they are sometimes inevitable, sometimes necessary, and sometimes both. You confuse the will to defend oneself with the blood lust for war.

  Jelly, i wasn't disagreeing with you, i understood exactly what you said. I just used a little bit of poetic licence.

  What I said is that they are sometimes inevitable, sometimes necessary, and sometimes both.

  I agree...
• 
  17

  Hey, You Masters of War

  by TheOldHippie in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  in these days of the great cowboys preparing for the man-hunt, here are some lines telling what the mediterranean/european sentiments are, as published by a political commentator.

  i just quote them to show the us-europe gap:.

  un minuto de silencio... .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  GWEEDO

  Larc

  So what do you suggest we should do?

  Good question. What should we do? Does anyone know? Does Bush know?

  There needs to be a little more explanation on Bush's part as to what he is actually going to do --without going into precise military detail of course-- before bombs start falling.
• 
  17

  Hey, You Masters of War

  by TheOldHippie in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  in these days of the great cowboys preparing for the man-hunt, here are some lines telling what the mediterranean/european sentiments are, as published by a political commentator.

  i just quote them to show the us-europe gap:.

  un minuto de silencio... .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  GWEEDO

  Well, Hippster...welcome to the age of video game wars where you can fly at 10,000 ft and drop bombs all day and not feel a god damn thing. People will be watching this war on CNN with pop corn in hand cheering as a top view lines up some cross hairs on some poor bastards house and blows it to kingdom come. A generation of disconnected Arm chair commandos we are.

  But like Jelly said, sometimes war just happens. Don't mean you have to like it though.
• 
  41

  Is evolution a fact or theory?

  by sleepy in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  is evolution a fact or a theory?.

  i suppose it depends on what you mean.. evolution in the sense of change from one generation to the next seams to be fact.. is well observed that offspring from a given creature will differ from the parent in different ways and thus after many generation can come to be quite different.. also that the genes of a creature can be affected by radiation from the sun and be alter in a novel way producing new and unique features in its offspring ( as long as the mutation is in the sperm or the egg).. that we came about via changes in the genes that eventually created a very different creature than that existed many generations ago , is that a fact?.

  this requires that not only that there are changes between generation but also that these changes could be directed by different environments to such a degree that only certain specialised features could survive and reproduce offspring whilst other creatures have died out and only remain in fossilised form.. what evidence is there that such environments can and have existed?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  GWEEDO

  Ripped off the FAQ at Talkorigins

  [url] http://talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-qa.html[/url]

  I thought evolution was just a theory. Why do you call it a fact?

  Biological evolution is a change in the genetic characteristics of a population over time. That this happens is a fact. Biological evolution also refers to the common descent of living organisms from shared ancestors. The evidence for historical evolution -- genetic, fossil, anatomical, etc. -- is so overwhelming that it is also considered a fact. The theory of evolution describes the mechanisms that cause evolution. So evolution is both a fact and a theory.
• 
  8

  What Islamic Fundamentalists are really afraid of;

  by Abaddon in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  ... is women.

  (from the daily telegraph, a british national paper).

  in the next few days, our boys will be taking on the taliban, and we must all pray they succeed.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  GWEEDO

  Abaddon,

  The trouble with the war against Islamic fundamentalist terror is that the terrorists themselves have no interest in talking.

  That should be perfect for the US considering the botched diplomatic jobs they've done in Kosovo and Iraq.

  Who's given out the non-negotiable Ultimatum here anyway?

  Pakistan is having, it appears, one final fling to convince the Taliban to give bi-Laden up. The U.S. still hasn't responded to a Taliban request for evidence either. The Taliban may well be jerking everyone around with this stuff but the U.S. should explore all diplomatic avenues before they start dropping bombs. Pakistan was shown a dossier of the evidence on the 2 bombings in Africa in 98 and found the evidence very convincing. They have suggested the U.S. release that.

  Again, The Taliban may well be screwing around, but on the other hand, a request for evidence isn't unreasonable. NATO members have made the same request.