Canada pays 8 million dollars to terrorist!

[Subduction Zone]

I thought America went to Afghanistan to fight the root cause of the 9/11 attacks. Do you support terrorism?

We also support the treaties that the U.S. has signed. Combatants have rights, even if they are fighting against us. Do you support the atrocities of North Vietnam during the Vietnamese war? I don't. To oppose that one has to give the rights to our captivating we agreed to. Otherwise you are tacitly supporting those that tortured our soldiers that became prisoners of war.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Those who forget history....

True, except the lesson of the OP seems to be "Ignore context, make liberals out to be funding terrorism", when the real lesson should be "If you truly wish for someone who has done wrong to be justly punished, don't violate their human rights and thus entitle them to massive financial payout".

Or maybe just "don't violate people's human rights" would be snappier.

 

[Valjean]

I thought America went to Afghanistan to fight the root cause of the 9/11 attacks. Do you support terrorism?

The root cause was not in Afghanistan, if anything it was the expanding Prince Sultan air base in Saudi Arabia.

We had coveted the Middle East long before 9/11. We already had plans for conquest waiting on the shelf for a Klein moment.
Did Cheney and the Oil Bigs Plan the Iraq War Before 9/11? | Washington's Blog
Project for the New American Century - Wikipedia
'Rebuilding America's Defenses' and the Project for the New American Century, by Bette Stockbauer

The US military creates the very anti-American hostility it purports to defend us against. If we wanted to eliminate anti-Americanism all we'd have to do was stay home.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

The US military creates the very anti-American hostility it purports do defend us against. If we wanted to eliminate anti-Americanism all we'd have to do was stay home.

That kind of reminds me of an episode of It's Always Sunny In Phildelphia, "The Gang Gets Extreme". In it, the gang determine that their bad fortune may be down to the fact that they don't do enough good deeds, so they decide to do a "good deed" in hopes of bringing more fortune and wealth to themselves, so they take it upon themselves to give an immigrant family's home an "Extreme Home Makeover", which results in them kidnapping the terrified family in the middle of the night, allowing everyone in their neighbourhood to rob all their belongings, and destroying the entire interior of the family's house before accidentally obliterating it all in a fire.

Now that I think about it, the whole episode serves as a fairly apt metaphor for American foreign policy.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Those who forget history....

It also pays to ask "cui bono?" - who benefits?

I'm sure that it's not a coincidence that @Bob Jones is bringing this up during the election campaign. Now... whether it's because he's trying to steer people away from the Liberals himself or whether it's because it's front-of-mind for him because he's been listening to someone trying to steer people away from the Liberals... that's for him to say.

Edit: but this and the SNC Lavalin affair - along with, I presume, holding Doug Ford in a bunker somewhere to stop him from embarrassing himself and the Conservative Party - have proved to be useful to the Conservatives to distract us from things that would be inconducive to getting Conservatives elected.

Just remember that this is why Omar Khadr is coming up now.

 

[Shad]

HA HA..You sound like a Breixt supporter! Just kidding. Parliament in any common law country can amend civil laws at its will.

I cited law. You just assert. Try again

 

[Shad]

"Let's go overseas to invade a country, steal its oil, commit war crimes, kill hundreds of thousands and count them as 'collateral damage,' and then complain and play the victim when one of the natives there tries to kill us."

That is how the Allies won WW2 by not using kid gloves. Hitler Youth that joined the 12th SS Panzer Division were killed in combat as they were combatants. No one has the time to stop for an age roll. Factories next to schools were still bombed as human shields is a tactic to be ignored in warfare. Civilians working in those factors were part of the war effort making war materials for the military. They were not some innocents minding their business.

 

[Bob Jones]

Russians also had boy soldiers.

 

[Shad]

Russians also had boy soldiers.

Both WW1 and WW2 had soldiers that were children. Some like the Hitler Youth. Some were just kids lying about their age to join. We focus on the former but ignore the latter as well...the Allies won. Often we overlook the child, their choices, competences, etc and only focus on an age as if a birthday gifts someone with an increase in intelligence.

 

[Debater Slayer]

That is how the Allies won WW2 by not using kid gloves. Hitler Youth that joined the 12th SS Panzer Division were killed in combat as they were combatants. No one has the time to stop for an age roll. Factories next to schools were still bombed as human shields is a tactic to be ignored in warfare. Civilians working in those factors were part of the war effort making war materials for the military. They were not some innocents minding their business.

So now we're comparing Germany in World War II--where it was the clear aggressor--to Iraq in 2003, the latter having been invaded under the false pretense that there were WMDs.

The moral bankruptcy of conservative thinking never ceases to amaze me.

 

[Bob Jones]

I will never understand why America invade Iraq. It would have been cheaper to have done nothing.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Both WW1 and WW2 had soldiers that were children.

And in WWI, both sides used chemical weapons, which would be a war crime today. Understandings change.

More to the point, legal obligations change.

And they didn't treat Khadr like an adult soldier. POWs are held in conditions as close as possible in comfort to those provided to the soldiers of the armed forces holding the POWs, and POWs are released once the conflict ends.

 

[Shad]

And in WWI, both sides used chemical weapons, which would be a war crime today. Understandings change.

No rules on paper change. Victors are still the enforcers. How many US soldiers have been hauled before War Crimes Trials beside by the American government itself? What about Russians? Chinese?

More to the point, legal obligations change.

With no enforcement this means nothing but words on paper.

You have a child's view of the world it seems. International and the UN have no power unless the US says so.

And they didn't treat Khadr like an adult soldier.

Seems like they did.

POWs are held in conditions as close as possible in comfort to those provided to the soldiers of the armed forces holding the POWs, and POWs are released once the conflict ends.

He wasn't a legal POW.

See there is that enforcement issue again. Yawn

 

[Shad]

So now we're comparing Germany in World War II--where it was the clear aggressor--to Iraq in 2003, the latter having been invaded under the false pretense that there were WMDs.

So you have no idea what the word "Allies" means in context.... You overlook the point about children soldiers. Thanks for notifying me of this. Now try again.

The moral bankruptcy of conservative thinking never ceases to amaze me.

You are clueless and uneducated. Try again. Start with reading what I posted and looking up what terms means. Yawn.

Here I bolded words you ignored thus missed my point

Both WW1 and WW2 had soldiers that were children. Some like the Hitler Youth. Some were just kids lying about their age to join. We focus on the former but ignore the latter as well...the Allies won. Often we overlook the child, their choices, competences, etc and only focus on an age as if a birthday gifts someone with an increase in intelligence.

You did exactly what I said people do. They ignore what the Allies did as well. Thanks for proving me correct. Buffoon

You are confusing being accurate with being a conservative while you live in lala land refusing to look at the reality of warfare and what I actually posted which was about children in war.

 

[Valjean]

I will never understand why America invade Iraq. It would have been cheaper to have done nothing.

But that wouldn't have improved our regional military hegemony, to say nothing of access to oil, money from military contracts, &c.

 

[columbus]

SO terrorist gets 8 million and murder victim zero!

How about the murdered soldier?

So let me get this straight.

A) People defending their homes from foreign invaders are terrorists.

B) People who die invading a foreign country are murder victims.

C) Torturing enemy combatants is OK, by your moral lights.

Did I miss anything?
Tom

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

So let me get this straight.

A) People defending their homes from foreign invaders are terrorists.

B) People who die invading a foreign country are murder victims.

C) Torturing enemy combatants is OK, by your moral lights.

Did I miss anything?
Tom

The issue is that soldiers' widows can't generally sue the soldier who killed their spouses. One soldier killing another in the course of a battle in a war isn't generally considered wrongdoing unless there are extenuating circumstances. This is why there aren't a ton of lawsuits filed by the widows on both sides after every war.

The reason that Sgt. Speers's widow wouldn't be successful in a lawsuit is that there isn't really a basis for a claim. Khadr didn't commit any crime, AFAICT. The law he was charged under wasn't even passed until years after the incident happened. His confession was extracted under torture; other American soldiers who were there reported that the grenade was thrown by a Mujahedeen who was killed in the fighting.

So:

- there's evidence that someone else killed Sgt. Speers.
- if Khadr did it, killing soldiers on the opposing side of a war generally isn't a crime.
- we generally don't hold child soldiers accountable for what they did as child soldiers.

Canadian courts would recognize all of this. THAT'S why Sgt. Speers's widow hasn't received any of the settlement.

... but the US is a whole different ball of wax. The US government should be liable for Khadr's torture, too. Maybe Sgt. Speers's widow would have better luck in a US court and would be able to get the courts to divert all or part of Khadr's settlement to her.

So that's the answer for @Bob Jones - Sgt. Speers's widow hasn't received any settlement money because the US government has refused to acknowledge its wrongdoing.

 

[Bob Jones]

I am amazed how many people support terrorism and attempt to apologise for a radical Muslim who left peaceful Canadian for the battlefields. <<why did he go and join this group<? Canada is a wonderful place to live!