It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by bigbert81
reply to post by Bunch
Fair enough. But do you realize that they're using the exact same argument for Iran that we heard for Iraq. No weapons found, just an attack that killed 1.2 million Iraqis and thousands of U.S. soldiers. And as far as "terrorism" goes, Al-Qaeda is replenished.
Originally posted by Electro38
Fair enough. But do you realize that they're using the exact same argument for Iran that we heard for Iraq. No weapons found, just an attack that killed 1.2 million Iraqis and thousands of U.S. soldiers. And as far as "terrorism" goes, Al-Qaeda is replenished.
They're not using the same argument. It is much different in this case (Iran) because they have developed a nuclear program, also Ahmedinejad has said in public on numerous occasions that Israel should be destroyed.
Also, isn't there proof that the Iranian gov. supports and aids terrorist organizations? Haven't they publically made their support known?
1. They have a nuke program
2. They support terrorism
Can anyone say that this is not true? I think the whole world agrees with that.
This is why it is very different than Iraq.
(Not saying it's right, or wrong. I really don't know. But I do know the Iran situation is very different than Iraq.)
Originally posted by Electro38
Yes, we (America) have a nuke program, however we are not supporters of terrorism and our leaders don't make crazy statements about destroying other countries.
Originally posted by grover
Originally posted by Electro38
Yes, we (America) have a nuke program, however we are not supporters of terrorism and our leaders don't make crazy statements about destroying other countries.
No but we have supported them... go ask the average Nicaraguan about the Contra death squads... or the average Chilean or Argentine about the disappeared... governments or insurgents we backed.
Who is the number one arms dealer to the world? We are.
Who is the one country opposed to banning land mines, who could actually do something about it? We are. We sell them and put those profits first.
The list goes on and it is a shameful one at that, especially given our rhetoric.
Originally posted by Zaargg
Originally posted by semperfortis
reply to post by Zaargg
The UCMJ would prevent that
All Military Personnel are covered under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. It contains pretty extensive guidelines and protections against just what your talking about...
Semper
I looked through the UCMJ articles
UCMJ Articles
And the only provisions relating to the scenario I provided in my post are:
881. ART. 81. CONSPIRACY
885. ART. 85. DESERTION
888. ART. 88. CONTEMPT TOWARD OFFICIALS
809. ART. 90. ASSAULTING OR WILLFULLY DISOBEYING SUPERIOR COMMISSIONED OFFICER.
892. ART. 92. FAILURE TO OBEY ORDER OR REGULATION
894. ART. 94. MUTINY OR SEDITION
904. ART. 104. AIDING THE ENEMY
These are punitive articles describing various crimes that relate to the hypothetical scenario I posted before. Under NONE of these articles did I find ANY explanation about "Immoral, Unethical, or Illegal orders" being legal to disobey. In addition, I found no provisions throughout the entire code covering the jurisdiction of the Military Court to acknowledge the illegality of or question the legality of an executive order from the CIC.
Could you help me find where these articles are?
Thanks Semper.
Originally posted by grover
simply put the best way to deal with nations like Iran is to engage them not threaten or attack them... not unless there are absolutely no options left, and we are no where near that point yet.
As for Israel... not the UN, not the United States, nobody but Israel itself can do anything about its problems with its Arab neighbors, and that includes Iran. They have got to get off their high horse and pull their heads out of their rear and deal HONESTLY with the Palestinian problem and until and only until then, will there be any chance of peace in the Mid-East.
Originally posted by Bunch
reply to post by Zaargg
I think I tried to answer your question a couple of pages ago but you might have skip it so here I go again.
The Geneva Convention outlines the rules of war, that is the supreme law of the land according to the constitution, when war plans are drawn the U.S. has to make sure that they are abiding by this rules and one way they do that is by bringing military lawyers at the time that war plans are drawn.
Is during that phase of planning that all the kinks regarding proper use of force and other treaties are examine, reviewed and scratch out of the plan or included.
As to what happens if civilian command try to push an illegal order in disregard of international law, my guess will be that there are procedures in place that would allow for the removal of that person from that position.
If you are refering to an illegal order issue during the heat of the battle then is up to the troops in question at the time to decide if that order should be follow or not. Then if going to be decide it by a military tribunal if the order was indeed illegal or not.
Hopes that helps.
[edit on 18-9-2007 by Bunch]
Originally posted by astmonster
reply to post by bigbert81
"Dude, what do you base your beliefs on?"...........?
How about actual FACT. Iraq is a just war. After Saddam was hanged, the war has been extended by IRAN. Therefore Iran has declared war on the US, time we took the war to Tehran.
Forget the "tripe" being spewed on this site and major media. Amadingdong will kill YOU to bring on the 12 imam of his insane and vile cult called Islam. Amadingdong will kill millions of innocent children to force his 12th out of the well.
Wake-up or sleep at 1,000,000 degrees some night. This is fact, not some fantasy on TV or Xbox..............
Originally posted by Electro38
I appreciate your reply.
Originally posted by Electro38I don't condone bombing anyone, anywhere.
The "insecurity" comes from seeing my city's greatest building get demolished on TV, and then seeing the smoke plume for about 3 weeks afterwards. My city was attacked, and my family was at risk.
And this attack didn't come from a "super power". So I disagree with you're argument that I (or you) should only feel threatened by a "super power". They were radical nuts in a cave.
Originally posted by Electro38
When you experience something like that in your city, and when you come to the realization that your city is constantly "under the gun" with constant risk to your family, then let me know how you would feel.
Originally posted by Electro38
I never said anywhere that there should be an attack on Iran, I believe, and hope there will not.
Originally posted by Electro38
You guys are so used to seeing, and responding to the cliche` posts from people who have "denied ignorance" (however, instead denied that they are victims of it), that you can't see "multi-dimensional" posts, which are neither purely black, or white. Which explains your uni-dimensional, cliche` replies.
In other words, I'm not saying USA = good, Iran = bad.
(Please don't take offense to my reply, I'm just waxing dramatic, a little)
Thanks.