Guantanamo Detainee Shows scars from torture on tape...

[Odpierdol_sie!]

Is this better for you? I didn't know I was being graded by my teacher. I migh jusa no be edjumacated like everybody elsa sir. Yes my understanding of the definition of war exemplary to the T. Most people with simple to complex logic could understand war this way.


It is a war wether you like to look through a glass or behind a curtain.


"WAR - A contention by force; or the art of paralyzing the forces of an enemy.

It is either public or private. It is not intended here to speak of the latter.

Public war is either civil or national. Civil war is that which is waged between two parties, citizens or members of the same state or nation. National war is a contest between two or more independent nations) carried on by authority of their respective governments.

War is not only an act, but a state or condition, for nations are said to be at war not only when their armies are engaged, so as to be in the very act of contention, but also when, they have any matter of controversy or dispute subsisting between them which they are determined to decide by the use of force, and have declared publicly, or by their acts, their determination so to decide it.

National wars are said to be offensive or defensive. War is offensive on the part of that government which commits the first act of violence; it is defensive on the part of that government which receives such act; but it is very difficult to say what is the first act of violence. If a nation sees itself menaced with an attack, its first act of violence to prevent such attack, will be considered as defensive.

To legalize a war it must be declared by that branch of the government entrusted by the Constitution with this power. And it seems it need not be declared by both the belligerent powers. By the Constitution of the United States, Art. I, Congress is invested with power "to declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water; and they have also the power to raise and support armies, and to provide and maintain a navy."



-
http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/w038.htm

Ok fair enough, Im not gonna buy in to your sarcasm and can see that you know how to use search engines to find answers.

If it is a "war" as you so clearly believe, who is this war between and for what reason is this war going on?

[goose]

Ok fair enough, Im not gonna buy in to your sarcasm and can see that you know how to use search engines to find answers.

If it is a "war" as you so clearly believe, who is this war between and for what reason is this war going on?

The American media has infected this dude.Its tough being on that side of the pond,just ask Noam Chomsky this.

[Odpierdol_sie!]

The American media has infected this dude.Its tough being on that side of the pond,just ask Noam Chomsky this.

Where is the sense in your statement? How is the America media going to infect me?

You guys are all jumping on the band wagon saying this is a war... The definition that was given proves that its not.

The fact of this story is..... troops were in an area and came under fire or were provoked in to returning fire. They would not have acted in an offensive manner for no reason.
The troops were in an area that is not classed as a war zone... yes there are battles and small scale "wars" going on there but it does not class it as a war because the people who are doing the fighting against US troops etc are members of illegal groups of insurgents.

If it was a war it would have been sanctioned by more than one country other than the US and would have an identified enemy sanctioned to lead the offensive by the government or the sovereign of that state that the US has declared war against.....

I think you will have a hard time to "google" me a page that says US goes to war on Afghanistan or US goes to war on the middle east.... it will be more like, "Bush backs war against terror" which is a totally different concept altogether.


This kid when threw the grenade took responsibility of his own actions.
He is not protected by the Geneva convention because he is not a member of a recognized military establishment (hence being an insurgent).
Since he is a civilian he has no special rights under the Geneva convention.

The laws that he should be treated by are the Human rights act....... since Sharia law has its own version of the human rights act, the rights act such as the US or the EU can be thrown out of the window.

For his actions under sharia law he can be trailed as an adult. The penalty for this act under sharia law is the death penalty.
An adult under Sharia Law is classed as "one who can reproduce"... putting him well in to adult hood (ruling out any special treatment as a child).

Sharia law states also, for a child to act as an adult in committing serious crimes they must be considered an adult and treated accordingly. i,e if a 9 year old girl was messing about with a married man and was arrested for adultery then she could be stoned to death.... if a 9 year old boy raped a woman then they may be castrated, in both cases the child would be tried as an adult.


Shave his head tie him to a tree, tar n feather him then let the crows peck out his eyes as he starves to death.... id say that will be a fitting end to this scum!