21-11-2004 04:23									#241
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

I think I know the case, but I dunno who tried him. It would seem reasonable to assume that a lot of lawyers got paid a lot of money though

	21-11-2004 04:34									#242
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

I found a link http://www.guardian.co.uk/japan/sto...,514602,00.html
It seems Japanese authorities are dealing with it...

	21-11-2004 04:41									#243
	Support Apolyton

Yeah, that's the case I was talking about. Thanks!

It's been 3 years now...I wonder what the situation is...

	21-11-2004 05:16									#244
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

vodkavov and St. Marcus, good debate.

I presume that your definitions of a mercenary, American troops themselves are mercenaries because they are not Iraqis.

As to the foreign fighters, they seem to be working for Zarqawi. This makes them Al Qaeda because Zarqawi is working for bin Laden. Also, at that Zarqawi's base in Falluja we found a wall mural which stated that it was a base for the Al Qaeda organization.

Now I know that the US administration has an opinion that captured members of Al Qaeda are not POWs, but what are they?

Back to the question of the jurisdiction of the international criminal Court, who could bring a complaint against the Marine if the Marine Corps decides not to prosecute him, which appears likely in my view.

	21-11-2004 06:28									#245
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

No, US troops are there at the request of the Iraqi government (apparently), so I think that would qualify them as being counted as legitimate, as they are technically party to the conflict.

I guess you could argue that Al Qaeda are legally mercenaries, as they seem to fit a lot of the qualifications:

*being recruited abroad to engage in hostilities (Art. 47 s.2(a))
*taking part in hostilities (Art. 47 s.2(b))
*not being nationals of either of the parties to the conflict (Art. 47 s.2(d))
*nor are they members of the armed forces party to the conflict (Art.47 s.2(e))

So, I guess you could make the argument that Geneva would count them as mercenaries, so perhaps the US does have grounds for its claim of unlawful combatants...

Personally, I doubt the ICC would even bother with such a case, given the expense involved. Realistically, I don't think the US could not punish him in some way - even if it's a dishonourable discharge - given the media pressure.

(Btw. these aren't my definitions of a mercenary, they come from Article 47 of the most recent Geneva Convention )

	21-11-2004 06:39									#246
	this evil world Full PM-box? Change here!

All this hoo-ha about one bloke being killed off is pathetic. Much worse things have occured/are occuring in Iraq. Dropping great big high-explosive bombs (non-weopons off mass destruction) on groups of civvies for example. Such a thing has even been filmed and broadcast on the telly. No hoo-ha.
But then, we've been doing it for a long time now. We god-fearing peaceful-loving democratic westerners are expert at this. We perfected the process in World War Two.
Sadism comes in many forms.
No hoo-ha.

	21-11-2004 06:53									#247
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

I'm not denying that...

	21-11-2004 07:41									#248
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Oerdin I'm so glade Kuci says Vietnam wasn't a war. For a moment I believed the propaganda that people died there.

and family

	21-11-2004 16:44									#249
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: vodkavov and St. Marcus, good debate.

Thank you.

quote: I guess you could argue that Al Qaeda are legally mercenaries, as they seem to fit a lot of the qualifications:

That indeed applies to non-Iraqi Al Qaida members. However, it seems that 90% of the Al Qaida fighters who fought in Fallujah, were Iraqi sunnites (including the guy killed). So what should one call those people? Where does insurgency vs counter-insurgency stop and civil war begin?

	21-11-2004 19:40									#250
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

I think the difference between civil war and insurgency is that in a civil war you have two (or more) sides of one single nation (or even race/nationality) that fight one another in open conflict. Insurgency implies that one (or even more) sides acts in a manner, which for want of a better word could be described as terrorism or guerrilla warfare. Insurgency implies that one side acts to overthrow or convince the existing state of its views using tactics not associated with traditional open warfare where sides are more clearly defined. Insurgents tend to blend with the civil populace and therefore traditional tactics are relatively ineffective. Though I must admit the line is rather blurred. One could also make the point that with a more internationalised world, it's rather difficult to have an isolated civil war. Spain would be a good example, as would many of those during the Cold War, such as Angola.

And yes, I did forget to specify that the only members of Al Qaeda that would classify as mercenaries would be the foreign fighters.

	21-11-2004 22:34									#251
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

The war that was begun in March of 2003 did not end. The people who are fighting in Falluja and elsewhere in the country are the former regime, its military and its allies. The fact that we formed an interim government in the meantime changes nothing. Recall that the Japanese installed an interim government in China even while they continued the war. The fact that there was an interim government did not change that war into a civil war between one Chinese government and another Chinese government. That war remained at all times Japan against China.

	21-11-2004 22:46									#252
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

I don't think Al Qaeda and Saddam can be considered 'allies'. Afterall Baathist philosophy has more in common with Stalinist communism than with any more Islamist train of thought. And communism being inherantly atheist... I think you get the picture. The former regime elements argument is a joke, they don't even say that in the media (in the UK) anymore. The open war ended after the fall of Saddam, the conflict moved onto a different stage, now it's an insurgency, as the opponents of the US do not represent any recognised armed force (in fact the Geneva Convention would not even recognise them for the reasons I listed earlier).

The insurgents are guerrilla fighters, but do not necessarily form one cohesive fighting organisation as with Mao's partisans (or with Jiang's nationalists for that matter). They do not represent a state, and many are most likely opportunist gangs, which see money in the anarchy that exists. That is why this is a counter-insurgency campaign, as the ultimate aim of the Coalition (inter alia) is to establish order within Iraq.

	21-11-2004 23:12									#253
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Yeah . . . . . . .



the Vietnam War was not a war -- it's just that more than 50,000 American soldiers and over one million Vietnamese died, playing in the mud, making mud pies.

	21-11-2004 23:22									#254
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by MrFun Yeah . . . . . . . the Vietnam War was not a war -- it's just that more than 50,000 American soldiers and over one million Vietnamese died, playing in the mud, making mud pies.

sad..it was referred to as a Police Action....

but many of us lost family members

sad...pawns of politics..

	21-11-2004 23:54									#255
	Put an end to popups!

Vietnam was different to Iraq in that the North Vietnamese government provided backing and logistical support for one main group in South Vietnam, the NLF. The North Vietnamese government also sent PAVN troops south to fight against the US backed government. The groups operating in Iraq do not fit the standard (Geneva's) interpretation of an army. The groups also do not (so it would seem) have official sanction and backing from a state. This is different to Vietnam. The NLF had a large logistical network within SouthVietnam unlike with Iraq, where there are many groups acting with different agendas.

I'm guessing that the Vietnam comments're addressed at Kuci's comments. No where did I state that Vietnam was not a conflict even though it might not fit the traditional style of war, but the sides were more clear cut in Vietnam. In Iraq, there are many groups, many of which are probably just opportunist criminals.

	22-11-2004 00:07									#256
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by vodkakov I'm guessing that the Vietnam comments're addressed at Kuci's comments.

that be the reason for my responses of which I made and am done just adding me own $0.02worth

Gramps

	22-11-2004 01:51									#257
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Well, V, here in the US we never at any time declared the war ended or the war won. We did state in May 2003 that major combat operations were done. Given Fallujah, that statement was obviously a bit premature.

Also the war changed in character when Saddam was captured. Leadership then fell to the most senior Iraqi commanders and to Zarqawi. Since then, those commanders have agreed to swear allegiance to Zarqawi as Commander in Chief.

Until Falluja fell, the enemy continued to control territory in Iraq. But still, even after its fall, the war is not over, in my view. I believe the Iraqis captured in Fallujah will be accorded POW status.

	22-11-2004 01:59									#258
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Ned I believe the Iraqis captured in Fallujah will be accorded POW status.

Does that mean they only get moderately tortured?

	22-11-2004 02:00									#259
	Remove this text

If anyone evr wants to know up close and personal how War or Combat or a Police Action affects an individual...


Read Mar
ine Corps Lt. Clebe McClary's account..

it will really bless your heart to hear of a true American hero

Gramps

By the way, he spoken several times at our church in Jacksonville North Carolina, home of Marine Corps base Camp Lejeune and Marine Corps Air Station New River-McCutcheon Field

Gramps

	22-11-2004 02:04									#260
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Sava Does that mean they only get moderately tortured?

Why, yes, Sava. Whatever the Geneva convention proscribes. They may even have the right to have visits from the Red Crescent, receive mail and otherwise be tortured.

	22-11-2004 02:10									#261
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Ned Why, yes, Sava. Whatever the Geneva convention proscribes.

Don't you mean "whatever the White House counsels' interpretation of the Geneva convention" is?

Maybe we can ask Enron lawyer, and new attorney G, Alberto Gonzalez what he thinks.

I suspect he'll only approve moderate torture and beat downs for "insurgent" POW's... that is... the POW's that don't get executed by US soldiers.

	22-11-2004 02:13									#262
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Sava Don't you mean "whatever the White House counsels' interpretation of the Geneva convention" is? Maybe we can ask Enron lawyer, and new attorney G, Alberto Gonzalez what he thinks. I suspect he'll only approve moderate torture and beat downs for "insurgent" POW's... that is... the POW's that don't get executed by US soldiers.

then we have more beheadings and then we have more beatings and more unauthorized shootings..toss in a few disloyal Americans who wanna help the terrorists..
then mix it up and start it all over again...

	22-11-2004 02:33									#263
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

hey Gramps

how many Americans would be beheaded if there were no Americans in Iraq?

how many Americans would be blamed for murdering Iraqis on Al-Jazeera and the rest of Arab media if there were no Americans in Iraq?

didn't you make some remark about soldiers being pawns of politicians during Vietnam? what's changed?

send Bush and Cheney to Iraq

carry on

	22-11-2004 03:00									#264
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Sava hey Gramps how many Americans would be beheaded if there were no Americans in Iraq? how many Americans would be blamed for murdering Iraqis on Al-Jazeera and the rest of Arab media if there were no Americans in Iraq? didn't you make some remark about soldiers being pawns of politicians during Vietnam? what's changed? send Bush and Cheney to Iraq carry on

Hey Sava

I dont agree with beheadings first and foremost...

The people doing humanitarian aid to help the non-aggressors..why should they die?

As for people making money off this war..now that I have a problem with but am unable to do anything about, personally, I would not go work there..if I was still active duty then yes I would go and offer my self up for my Commander In Chief

Bush and Cheney dont need to go the troops do..

Now have we accomplished what we started to do..not sure as I am not privy to the plan..you see plans tend to get changed when too many eyes see them...

Yes soldiers are indeed very often pawns in war..thats the way it has been I suspect since day one of being a commander

sad but thats the way it is..

Oh and for the record if there were no Americans in Iraq or Afghanistan...how many more terrorrists would now be in training or completed training to the next level..or did I miss something..9-1-1 I was working in an office when some terrorists towel-head told some more terrorist towelheads to fly planes into buildings..am i missing something?

What should of our response been..?

wring our hands and "HOPE " they might go away?

I dont think thats the way it works..we tried that..we went over to IRAQ and left and terrorism didnt stop?

Ok..I dont have all the answers and you dont nor does Dan or Ming.. .. well..maybe MING has answers to 'Poly Problems..but for real it is a very complex issue..doing nothing and sitting on our hands and going "Woe Is me" aint the answer...
Just my $0.02 worth


Gramps

	22-11-2004 03:34									#265
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Grandpa Troll Bush and Cheney dont need to go the troops do.. Yes soldiers are indeed very often pawns in war..thats the way it has been I suspect since day one of being a commander

Well, thatīs the difference to the good old times,
where the Leader personally would lead the charge of his knights and share with his soldiers the risk of getting wounded or killed.

Medieval times in Europe i think, and somehow longer in Japan
(although in Japan the daimyo normally wouldnīt lead the charge, but be at least present at the battlefield, so that the troops by seeing him during the Battle would get moral support and fight harder)

	22-11-2004 03:41									#266
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Proteus_MST Well, thatīs the difference to the good old times, where the Leader personally would lead the charge of his knights and share with his soldiers the risk of getting wounded or killed. Medieval times in Europe i think, and somehow longer in Japan (although in Japan the daimyo normally wouldnīt lead the charge, but be at least present at the battlefield, so that the troops by seeing him during the Battle would get moral support and fight harder)

I wonder and dont have a basis to dispute but for real wonder how much is lore and how much is truth to how close they got exactly?

I mean they didnt have 1 mile + sniper rifles then..nor did they have 5 mile mortar file..nor did they have airborne weaponry..

I ask hbecause somehow we evolved or perhaps better terminolgy departed from that mode of thinking..was it becasue of modern technolgy or at least the advancements of the day?

I also when watching civil war battle rage think how fricking stupid it was to march straight toward an enemy and shoot..

one shoots then one reloads and so forth..sure skirmish lines where several riows fired or reloaded..

I know we fight from a distance but we still have commanders on the field..


I believe and if I am wrong please share with me, that the general consensus is if the President and V P had to be in battle we might not jump as quickly or stay as long..
Indeed this might be the case..

It was in Chili yesterday!!

	22-11-2004 03:59									#267
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Well,
either that
or having as a rule, that each member of congress, senate and white house with children must have at least one of them in the military, in a unit which would really do frontline duty in the case of war.

	22-11-2004 04:13									#268
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Sava hey Gramps how many Americans would be beheaded if there were no Americans in Iraq? how many Americans would be blamed for murdering Iraqis on Al-Jazeera and the rest of Arab media if there were no Americans in Iraq? didn't you make some remark about soldiers being pawns of politicians during Vietnam? what's changed? send Bush and Cheney to Iraq carry on

How many Americans would not have died had we not saved Europe from Nazi Germany, and Asia from Imperial Japan?

	22-11-2004 04:54									#269
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Proteus_MST Well, either that or having as a rule, that each member of congress, senate and white house with children must have at least one of them in the military, in a unit which would really do frontline duty in the case of war.

and we know we cant change preferential treatment as that is human nature and goes on almost everywhere..although would be nice..

I dun think if I was in the middle of a firefight I would want a man or woman who has led a sheltered life and goes and freaks out under pressure..not that they are the only ones mind you just if they had been spoon fed eevrything it might not be the time to get ahead of the curve

	22-11-2004 06:22									#270
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Seems to me we're throwing common sense out the window.

After the tenth "wounded" guy has booby-trapped himself and killed some of your buddies, what are you suppose to do? What goes through your mind in that situation? I'm not asking to be a smartass, but it seems to me that it's possible the marine (who was undoubtably twitchy after a few hard days of fighting) was reasonably in his Precaution.

Or he could have just waited around for him being awarded a Darwin.