Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

sactowndog

Targeting Cultural Sights

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, easybronc said:

Yeah, the other thing, the head covering ... hijab.  

Thats why I'm not the ambassador to Iran

Nope. Not a hijab either. It’s called a chador. No worries. I’m sure a Trump appointee wouldn’t know either. 

Thay Haif Said: Quhat Say Thay? Lat Thame Say

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, mugtang said:

That policy may have been morally wrong but it wasn’t a crime. And if you believe military commanders would knowingly commit a prosecutable war crime then I don’t think you understand how it works.  There’s a reason we don’t carpet bomb cities or use chemical weapons anymore. 

Our law enforcement against war crimes is lagging under Nacho Duce. 

Thay Haif Said: Quhat Say Thay? Lat Thame Say

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, easybronc said:

Then someone needs to tell the Tehran Times about that.

https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/425218/Iran-to-mark-hijab-and-dignity-week

We’re bizarrely in the weeds of Muslim female dress, but you started out with the burqa, which as you probably know covers a woman’s entire body and head, with just an eye slit,  that is worn in Afghanistan and Central Asia. The Iranian equivalent is the chador, which is a long shawl that covers the head and most of the body but does not cover the face. Hijab is an Arabic word that refers to the religious requirement that women be covered, which is the underlying meaning in your article. In everyday usage in Iran a hijab is a female head scarf as worn across much of the Muslim world. In Iran it’s mostly worn by urban, western-oriented women who are doing the bare minimum to keep the cultural police off their backs. 

Thay Haif Said: Quhat Say Thay? Lat Thame Say

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, SDSUfan said:

We wouldn't.  The OP is attempting another in a seemingly never ending stream  pedantic ( and pathetic)" gotchas"  directed as us deplorables.  It's what passes for intellectual discussion from the left these days.

Trump has repeated twice now his intent.   If he goes through with the order then the military (who generally supports Trump) will have to choose between directly disobeying the order of a superior and following an order Trump has said twice he would give.   
 

Asking at what point you, and possibly Army leaders, will draw the line is hardly pedantic.  What is pathetic to date no of you have stated it would cross a line.   I fail to see how people are so sure the military would make a decision others wouldn’t particularly in light of the treatment of Col. Vindemann.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, sactowndog said:

Trump has repeated twice now his intent.   If he goes through with the order then the military (who generally supports Trump) will have to choose between directly disobeying the order of a superior and following an order Trump has said twice he would give.   
 

Asking at what point you, and possibly Army leaders, will draw the line is hardly pedantic.  What is pathetic to date no of you have stated it would cross a line.   I fail to see how people are so sure the military would make a decision others wouldn’t particularly in light of the treatment of Col. Vindemann.

Trump tweets lots of stuff every day that will never happen. 

Thay Haif Said: Quhat Say Thay? Lat Thame Say

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, sactowndog said:

I didn’t ask that.  I asked if you would support Trump if he did.  In fact, he has doubled down on his tweet in an Airforce one quote....

"They're allowed to kill our people, they're allowed to torture and maim our people, they're allowed to use roadside bombs and blow up our people, and we're not allowed to touch their cultural sites? It doesn't work that way," Trump said, according to a pool report.

I'm indifferent to it, they deserve it, and it's long overdue.

110926run_defense710.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Old_SD_Dude said:

Our law enforcement against war crimes is lagging under Nacho Duce. 

I’m not so sure why anyone assumes the Army will say no.   Has anyone looked at the careers of Yavanovitch or Vindman?   Trump broke laws but his base doesn’t care and the Senate will do nothing.  
 

What makes you or @mugtang so confident a Military officer will run his career over Iranian cultural sites?   Besides if he says no, what stops Trump from firing them and finding an officer who will follow his order. They will be in an impossible situation unless people like @modestobulldog or @Rebelbacker said it would end their support.  But they haven’t and won’t.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, sactowndog said:

Trump has repeated twice now his intent.   If he goes through with the order then the military (who generally supports Trump) will have to choose between directly disobeying the order of a superior and following an order Trump has said twice he would give.   
 

Asking at what point you, and possibly Army leaders, will draw the line is hardly pedantic.  What is pathetic to date no of you have stated it would cross a line.   I fail to see how people are so sure the military would make a decision others wouldn’t particularly in light of the treatment of Col. Vindemann.

The oath soldiers take says they will obey the orders of the officers and president according to the UCMJ and regulations.   You can only be prosecuted for disobeying lawful orders.  An order to commit a war crime is not a lawful order. Sure the soldier, officer, etc may be relieved of duty but a military court won’t convict you for that.  “I was only obeying orders” isn’t a valid defense.  

thelawlorfaithful, on 31 Dec 2012 - 04:01 AM, said:One of the rules I live by: never underestimate a man in a dandy looking sweater

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, mugtang said:

The oath soldiers take says they will obey the orders of the officers and president according to the UCMJ and regulations.   You can only be prosecuted for disobeying lawful orders.  An order to commit a war crime is not a lawful order. Sure the soldier, officer, etc may be relieved of duty but a military court won’t convict you for that.  “I was only obeying orders” isn’t a valid defense.  

I’m well aware of the UCMJ.  But nothing stops the SecDef from firing a general who disobeys the President.   At the end of the day, an officers ability to resist an unlawful order from the President rests on his willingness to sacrifice his immediate career or his faith in the American public.   I see nothing in the posters here that indicates faith in the American public is justified.  You’re free to start a poll and prove me wrong.  I would gladly be wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, modestobulldog said:

No, I don't support targeting cultural sites.  In fact the opposite, we should try to avoid doing so. 

Thank you and I agree. I was a history major as an undergrad but other than possibly the outlaw Mai Lei massacre during the Vietnam war, I can't recall our military ever intentionally destroying cultural sites. Indeed, as much as our men grew to hate the Japanese during WWII because of the Bataan death march and similar evils, I don't think they ever went out of their way to destroy Shinto shrines.

Boom goes the dynamite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SDSUfan said:

We wouldn't.  The OP is attempting another in a seemingly never ending stream  pedantic ( and pathetic)" gotchas"  directed as us deplorables.  It's what passes for intellectual discussion from the left these days.

Uh . . . Trump expressly said that among the alleged 52 sites already targeted by our military as being among points for retaliation were cultural sites. Just smh . . .

Boom goes the dynamite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SleepingGiantFan said:

Uh . . . Trump expressly said that among the alleged 52 sites already targeted by our military as being among points for retaliation were cultural sites. Just smh . . .

He tweeted it and the reiterated it when asked about it by the press.  The question is not would he do it.   The man said torture was fine and separated Children from their parents to make a point.   Bombing some cultural sites is well within his nature.  The question is would anyone hold him accountable.  From what we have seen from his supporters here the answer appears to be no.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, sactowndog said:

He tweeted it and the reiterated it when asked about it by the press.

This cultural sites thing is just the latest example of what an ignorant jackass we have for a president.

We won't have to wait more than a couple days for the next example.

Boom goes the dynamite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Trump does that he makes the step to genocidal war criminal. 
 

I don’t think the military would obey that lunatic on that one, fortunately. 

On 12/1/2016 at 12:26 PM, WyomingCoog said:

I own a vehicle likely worth more than everything you own combined and just flew first class (including a ticket for a 2 1/2 year old), round trip to Las Vegas and I'm not 35 yet. When you accomplish something outside of finishing a book, let me know. When's the last time you saw a 2 year old fly first class in their own seat? Don't tell me about elite.  

28 minutes ago, NorCalCoug said:

I’d happily compare IQ’s with you any day of the week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...