Posted on 03/04/2016 1:36:48 PM PST by maggief
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) wants to know if the military would carry out orders illegal under international law after GOP presidential front-runner Donald Trump suggested it would if he wins the White House.
Graham, who put national security at the center of his failed White House bid, sent a letter Friday to Gen. Joseph Dunford, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, about potential future presidential orders to intentionally target terrorists' families or reinstate waterboarding.
"If issued orders to target noncombatants, including children, or to use waterboarding or other extreme interrogation techniques, would you view these orders as lawful?" Graham asked in the letter.
He also wants to know what advice Dunford would give to troops asked to carry out the actions.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Fake attack. Not what he said.
Fix Linda ever ask about our military under Obama? What a creep!
Linda is more concerned about them doing this under TRUMP???? Maybe Linda should have asked that question about OBAMA.
Another thing that makes me laugh. How is a JAG like Lindsy this ignorant of the law?
The term ‘unlawful enemy combatant’ means: a person who has engaged in hostilities or who has purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States or its co-belligerents who is not a lawful enemy combatant (including a person who is part of the Taliban, al Qaeda, or associated forces)
In the United States, the Military Commissions Act of 2006 codified the legal definition of this term and invested the U.S. President with broad discretion to determine whether a person may be designated an unlawful enemy combatant under United States law
The Geneva Conventions do not recognize any lawful status for combatants in conflicts not involving two or more nation states. A state in such a conflict is legally bound only to observe Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions and may ignore all the other Articles. But each one of them is completely free to apply all or part of the remaining Articles of the Convention.[6]
This guy is going crazier and crazier.
Well if the military doesn’t do what obuma wants, he fires them....
In WW2, the US bombed enemy cities full of civilians, without anybody raising objections at the time.
After the war, we had ICBMs poised to wipe out cities full of civilians all across the USSR, without all that many people objecting.
Well said, thanks. Linda is just trying to stir up some fantasy sh!t and slander.
No, we just wish they would, Linda.
I’m one of those folks who didn’t understand why no one liked Lynddie Englund. I suspect Trump is in my corner on that one.
Ah, the girly-man Linda Graham speaks again!!
And the GOPe wonders why we don’t trust them and want them gone.
Too Complicated. For them to understand.
I have English friends - mostly born after WWII - who excoriate Bomber Harris. They don’t even understand how they wouldn’t be here without our ancestors strength of character and willingness to defy decorum and fight ugly to preserve western civilization.
The way Obama has forced some to do?
“Trump backs down from waterboarding comments, says he won’t ask troops to violate law - Washington Post”.
The answer is the same whether Trump is president or someone else. Military personnel can’t follow illegal orders or they can be prosecuted under UCMJ.
Since when does International Law “Trump” American law??
You mean...like bombing Dresden, Hamburg, Dusseldorf, Nuremberg, Berlin, Stuttgart, Tokyo, Yokohama, Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
I wonder if Hap Arnold or LeMay contemplated getting a letter from a Senator quizzing them on the ethics of bombing enemy cities.
Naaaaahhhh.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.