Posted on 12/13/2007 10:58:57 AM PST by traviskicks
One wouldn't know it by that comment.
“And you allow your troops to do so without restricting them and adding additional risk to their lives.”
God forbid that we abide by the Geneva Conventions and the Laws of Armed Conflict.
First, I was talking about restricting the troops from engaging the enemy while he hides in mosques.
Second, what 'right' do the terrorists have to the Geneva Convention?
“First, I was talking about restricting the troops from engaging the enemy while he hides in mosques.”
You mean those very same mosques that we have attacked in the past because of the enemy hiding in them?
“Second, what ‘right’ do the terrorists have to the Geneva Convention?”
Well O’clueless one, WE meaning the United States is a signatory of said conventions that means that WE must abide by them eventhough our enemy does not.
You mean those very same mosques that we have attacked in the past because of the enemy hiding in them?
Only after getting permission to do so, even after being fired upon.
In fact, U.S. troops in some cases weren't even allowed to enter them, they have to have Iraqi's go in.
“Second, what ‘right’ do the terrorists have to the Geneva Convention?” Well O’clueless one, WE meaning the United States is a signatory of said conventions that means that WE must abide by them eventhough our enemy does not.
No, a terrorist is not under the protection of the Geneva convention, he is outside the laws of nations since he rejects them.
He is simply an armed criminal.
“Only after getting permission to do so, even after being fired upon.”
Our troops do not need to ask for permission to defend themselves.
“In fact, U.S. troops in some cases weren’t even allowed to enter them, they have to have Iraqi’s go in.”
Yeah God forbid that we allow the Iraqi’s to take more responsibility upon themselves.
“No, a terrorist is not under the protection of the Geneva convention, he is outside the laws of nations since he rejects them.”
Where did I say that terrorists have rights IAW the Geneva Conventions?
“He is simply an armed criminal.”
And that’s the logic behind the reason why the cut and run terrorist appeasing coward you support wants to bring back the failed policy of treating terrorism as a criminal matter.
Our troops do not need to ask for permission to defend themselves.
Ofcourse they do!
In many cases they must actually check with the AG to see if they can take out the enemy targets.
“In fact, U.S. troops in some cases weren’t even allowed to enter them, they have to have Iraqi’s go in.” Yeah God forbid that we allow the Iraqi’s to take more responsibility upon themselves.
And that wasn't the reason they weren't allowed to enter, they were forbidden so they would not offend. the 'delicate' Islamic sensibilities.
As far as I am concerned, the Iraqi's should be doing all of the fighting.
[No, a terrorist is not under the protection of the Geneva convention, he is outside the laws of nations since he rejects them.” ]
Where did I say that terrorists have rights IAW the Geneva Conventions?
You said that we have to give the terrorists under the protections of the Geneva Convention, because we signed it.
[ “He is simply an armed criminal.” ]
And that’s the logic behind the reason why the cut and run terrorist appeasing coward you support wants to bring back the failed policy of treating terrorism as a criminal matter.
No, it is you that wants to treat the terrorist as if he has 'rights' and you clearly said so.
I think they should be hunted down and killed.
So by your own words, you would give the terrorists the protection of the Geneva Convention.
Stop your double-talking!
“Ofcourse they do!
In many cases they must actually check with the AG to see if they can take out the enemy targets.”
BS!
“And that wasn’t the reason they weren’t allowed to enter, they were forbidden so they would not offend. the ‘delicate’ Islamic sensibilities.”
More BS!
“You said that we have to give the terrorists under the protections of the Geneva Convention, because we signed it.”
I DID NOT SAY THAT!
I said that WE are a signatory of the GC.
I DID NOT say that THEY were a signatory
I DID NOT say that they have protections under the GC.
“No, it is you that wants to treat the terrorist as if he has ‘rights’ and you clearly said so.”
Nice try LIAR, but I never said that.
“So by your own words, you would give the terrorists the protection of the Geneva Convention.
Stop your double-talking!”
I SAID “WE” MUST ABIDE BY THEM AND BECAUSE WE ABIDE BY THEM DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE TERRORISTS ARE “PROTECTED” BY THEM.
YOU ARE THE ONE DOING THE DAMN DOUBLE TALKING.
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.