Its descended to a 'shouting I'm right' and "you are ignorant" assertion essay with the chief apologist not able to marshal one fact to support unbridled unsubstantiated galloping opinion. Where is ONE FACT here in his latest polemics. Somene other than Darth show it to me, please? He's not objective when it comes to hos own illogic. I want someone else to check me to see if I read nothing but noise here. If he has an Idea there, show it please.

--------------------------------------------- 

 

Argue the facts presented please, ditch the emotion and insults, and explain here why you don't understand politics as vengeance either in war or in the courtroom?

 

You can do that, can't you?

If you can't, then just say so, and I will help reach for the actual argument to which you should aspire.  

You haven't articulated one point in support of your disagreement. You don't have any experience we know of that would qualify you either. I haven't disagreed with you or anyone else that this is best handled by the military. So what exactly are you trying to argue? Except of course that you think we should desecrate the bodies on Muslims in such an way as to hurt our own efforts. Unlike you I do have experience in that part of the world and with that culture. I know that there is a difference between some random soldier committing a war crime or an allegation from AQ propaganda and the USG actually officially committing a barbarous act that insults a core belief in Islam. SO what exactly are you trying to say specifically? Thus far you haven't said anything that would warrant anything more than a mild chuckle out of professionals who actually have to deal with this stuff.

-DA 

Attack the case, not the man. Until you have something to say about the case, you just waste effort and time.

 

Now do you have any facts or logic? So far, your posts have been off topic and not useful toward convincing some of us that you have a case built of anything but emotionalism . No science, no law, no sense about KSM or the Afgham .fiasco is whbat I read..

 

 

Sad.

 

"Murder civilians" is never a lawful order, and the Luftwaffe were known to attack unarmed civilian refugee convoys.

What is so hard about this?  Kill a bunch of folks in the US and we will put you on trial, convict you and give you the needle.  Its what happened to Tim McVeigh, the DC sniper and ought to work fine for KSM.  Unlike a lawsuit rules of discovery are different in a criminal case; you don't need to show your hand unless you want to (and why would you).  If we go and try him for war crimes and operating as an illegal combatant it opens a whole can of worms about legality of our own actions overseas, which even if never result in a conviction of our people will be a bigger pain then its worth.

 

My only gripe is that they did not do the trial in Virginia instead as they have electrocution instead, nothing like fresh crisped terrorist in the morning!

 

 So, we'll have professional wrestlers do it instead. I hope you don't consider a decapitation strike against the most powerful nation on Earth a 1-man random act. If so, you are doomed to fight whatever you label the proxies of our real enemy...Islam, forever.

Islam is not our enemy. Islam is a tool used by the enemy. Without understanding that difference we won't have success.

-DA 

Who, or what, do you believe to be the enemy?

Gimme a break.  Let's see...we have Allied air forces targeting industries in cities compared to Luftwaffe Ju-87s purposely targeting what were obviously civilian refugee columns--in the hopes that causing mass casualties and chaos would delay retreating armies in France and Russia.  Maybe the Luftwaffe was more circumspect in the West, but in Russia villages were obliterated that had no military purpose; Stalingrad was churned into rubble long after the Luftwaffe had already taken out anything of military significance.

 

What kind of ordnance, Hugo?  Are you referring to the incendiaries dropped over Japan?  True, they were designed to be most effective against wooden houses.  But the fact also remains that the Japanese had scattered their industry across their cities, and because of high-level winds over Japan, the only way that B-29s could destroy those factories was to burn the cities at low-level with incendiaries.  I'm sorry that so many Japanese children were killed in those firestorms--it's why Grave of the Fireflies is required viewing in my History of Japan courses--but the Japanese started the war.  If the Japanese leadership didn't want their cities torched, they should've thought of that before marching across the Marco Polo Bridge.