Karl`s PC Help Forums Last active: Never
Not logged in [Login ]
Go To Bottom

In memory of Karl Davis, founder of this board, who made his final journey 12th June 2007

Post Reply
Who Can Post? All users can post new topics and all users can reply.
Username   Need to register?
Password:   Forgot password?
Subject: (optional)
Icon: [*]
Formatting Mode:
Normal
Advanced
Help

Insert Bold text Insert Italicised text Insert Underlined text Insert Centered text Insert a Hyperlink Insert E-mail Hyperlink Insert an Image Insert Code Formatted text Insert Quoted text Insert List
Message:
HTML is Off
Smilies are On
BB Code is On
[img] Code is On
:) :( :D ;)
:cool: :o shocked_yellow :P
confused2 smokin: waveysmiley waggyfinger
brshteeth nananana lips_sealed kewl_glasses
Show All Smilies

Disable Smilies?
Use signature?
Turn BBCode off?
Receive email on reply?
The file size of the attachment must be under 200K.
Do not preview if you have attached an image.
Attachment:
    

Topic Review
Redwolf5150

[*] posted on 9-6-2014 at 11:56
I won't be drug into an argument with someone who won't see the facts that Bush LIED to get his authorization from Congress.

All I have to say is Where are his Weapons of Mass Destruction?

And the US NEVER leaves a soldier behind, EVER.

But you've never served in the military so you wouldn't appreciate that.

Now go peddle your Faux News Bullcrap to someone who doesn't have the brain cells to know it IS Bullcrap.
Nimuae

[*] posted on 9-6-2014 at 11:35
He seems to be being tried by media - will he ever dare go home?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2651223/Wife-soldier-left-paralyzed-unable-speak-risking-life-save-Bowe-Bergdahl-vents-f ury-message.html


Apparently his parents have been subjected to abuse as well - which should not be allowed to happen. Whatever this soldier may/may not have done it is wrong to pillory his parents.
Dreamweaver

[*] posted on 9-6-2014 at 10:16
Moved to "the other side" for reasons becoming apparent....
scholar

[*] posted on 9-6-2014 at 00:16
George W. Bush never started any war--Saddam violated the truce which suspended the war which Saddam began with the invasion of Kuwait, and hostilities resumed. As the facts came out later, Saddam had a secret arrangement with the French to use their UN Security Council veto to block any new resolution, so he thought he could get away with breaking the truce. But, no new resolution was needed--he had violated resolutions which had already been made.

The mission of removing Saddam and his thugs from control and governance WAS accomplished before the banner was placed. You don't get to choose a different mission and then complain about the banner because it doesn't match the mission which you would have set. Oh, I guess you could, if you want to make believe you have the authority to set the mission.

But, back to the original topic--Redwolf, how do you feel about trading the 5 highest al Quaeda terrorists in Gitmo for a U.S. Army deserter?
Redwolf5150

[*] posted on 8-6-2014 at 23:55
Quote:
Originally posted by scholar
Quote:
Originally posted by marymary100
I think that nothing the American government does at that level is haphazard.

The highest leadership has such a high opinion of himself that he decided it was OK to lie about his health care plan to get support for it, even when several of his advisers warned him that he wasn't telling the truth. Haphazard is his trademark.


As opposed to his predecessor who started a second war on false pretenses then had the GAUL to say "Mission Accomplished" on the deck of an aircraft carrier?

Looks like nothing here has changed. Might as well go back on "vacation" from the board again.

And people wonder why Giron left?
scholar

[*] posted on 8-6-2014 at 23:05
Quote:
Originally posted by marymary100
Broken record...

If you refer to the scratched records that would keep repeating the same groove--as many times as the President keeps making the same kind of mistake, the same kind of reaction to it is appropriate.

If the President had the humility to learn from those who have better knowledge and judgement, and if he would improve in his job performance, we could see personal and professional growth. And, truly, he has listened to good military advice more than I would have expected (e.g. he has allowed the military to accomplish some significant harm to terrorist enemies with drone attacks). It is sad that, when he makes bad decisions, he has been known to minimize the problem, blame others, or lie about it.
marymary100

[*] posted on 8-6-2014 at 20:48
Curiouser
marymary100

[*] posted on 8-6-2014 at 08:05
Broken record...
scholar

[*] posted on 8-6-2014 at 01:55
Quote:
Originally posted by marymary100
I think that nothing the American government does at that level is haphazard.

The highest leadership has such a high opinion of himself that he decided it was OK to lie about his health care plan to get support for it, even when several of his advisers warned him that he wasn't telling the truth. Haphazard is his trademark.
marymary100

[*] posted on 6-6-2014 at 06:18
I think that nothing the American government does at that level is haphazard. There will be some value in the exchange for America, perhaps not in the return of their own but in the release of one or more that they are returning. Unless of course All Americans in government are as stupid as Republicans would have us believe. When you factor in the military intelligence, there must be some reason why America wanted the exchange.
LSemmens

[*] posted on 6-6-2014 at 03:50
The pickering post comments are interesting.
scholar

[*] posted on 6-6-2014 at 00:56
Here is an article about the way military culture views deserters like Bergdahl, as contrasted with the way President Obama thought his illegal actions would be applauded.

The article says that, for most of our history, the return of deserters was sought mainly so they could be shot or hanged.
Nimuae

[*] posted on 5-6-2014 at 08:02
It is alleged that he had deserted before and was a known risk. One wonders if perhaps he has been brainwashed by the taliban and his subsequent release has a hidden agenda. Still, only those who were there will know the truth.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2648055/Bowe-Bergdahl-DID-walk-away-post-ca
marymary100

[*] posted on 4-6-2014 at 21:42
This story grows by the day. His home town has just cancelled his homecoming celebration.
John Barnes

[*] posted on 3-6-2014 at 22:23
Five of his compatriots have stood up and condemned him as a traitor, He deserted his post took off his uniform and left his weapon, if true then the president needs a head check, it sounds like desertion to me. Also to home arm chair pundits if you have never been in a guerrilla style war its best not pass your opinion, the Taliban are 6th century thinking people with no compunction to any Geneva convention. Look how the Vietcong treat their Allied prisoners also the Japanese, the Asian mind set is not the same as ours in the West
LSemmens

[*] posted on 2-6-2014 at 14:21
Arguably Guantanamo should not be still in use, but the issue, of course, is not so much as natural justice, because those being held there are being held as prisoners of war. If they are prisoners of war, there is no need for trial as they have broken no laws, per. se. and, once the war is over, they are released. The problem they have, though, is that America is not "At War" with another sovereign nation and, as such, the "enemy" cannot cede to them and have their soldiers returned. It is a grey area, should those who are plotting violence against a regime be detained or should we (royal 'we', here) wait until they attack and then detain those we catch? If they were plotting, and it is not on American (or British) soil, there is no way we can legally detain them except in a theatre of war, and only as prisoners of said war.
Badgergirl

[*] posted on 2-6-2014 at 12:34
Quote:
Originally posted by scholar
Quote:
Originally posted by Badgergirl
Guantanamo is a disgrace to the civilized world and it's continued existence makes a mockery of any decent American's idea of "Justice"

If we had anything useful on the prisoners in Guantanamo, they would have been tried and sentenced by now anyway.

Not so.

When war is waged against us, we are not under obligation to get court convictions, under criminal law statutes, while providing lawyers for the enemy combatants. It is a very common and lawful practice to shoot the enemy who is shooting at you, and to capture and detain those who throw down their arms.

And, while warfare is still being conducted, the attackers can lawfully and reasonably kept in captivity. Who in their right minds would give up someone, for no reason, who would return to the fight to kill again? (I say "for no reason" because I understand the idea of prisoner exchanges for prisoners of comparable value.)


I didn't say it wasn't legal, but I still maintain it's a disgraceful and unjust way to behave.

Most of the war has been shockingly amoral.

Capture, Detain and PUT ON TRIAL....that's justice.
scholar

[*] posted on 1-6-2014 at 20:19
Quote:
Originally posted by Badgergirl
Guantanamo is a disgrace to the civilized world and it's continued existence makes a mockery of any decent American's idea of "Justice"

If we had anything useful on the prisoners in Guantanamo, they would have been tried and sentenced by now anyway.

Not so.

When war is waged against us, we are not under obligation to get court convictions, under criminal law statutes, while providing lawyers for the enemy combatants. It is a very common and lawful practice to shoot the enemy who is shooting at you, and to capture and detain those who throw down their arms.

And, while warfare is still being conducted, the attackers can lawfully and reasonably kept in captivity. Who in their right minds would give up someone, for no reason, who would return to the fight to kill again? (I say "for no reason" because I understand the idea of prisoner exchanges for prisoners of comparable value.)
Badgergirl

[*] posted on 1-6-2014 at 18:13
Guantanamo is a disgrace to the civilized world and it's continued existence makes a mockery of any decent American's idea of "Justice"

If we had anything useful on the prisoners in Guantanamo, they would have been tried and sentenced by now anyway.


Innocent until proven guilty. Captive until proven "useful". It's a moral grey area anyway.
scholar

[*] posted on 1-6-2014 at 16:57
It would have been better if the President had not defied the law to do so.
I will be interested in learning the circumstances in which Bergdahl was captured. He was not with his unit at the time.
marymary100

[*] posted on 1-6-2014 at 10:01
5 years of captivity

He has been struggling with English after his immersion in Afghanistan.

I hope he manages to re-assimilate into American life.