jlf1961
Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008 From: Somewhere Texas Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: bounty44 just to make sure I get this straight. its NOT okay for trump to do x, y or z policy wise because it will endanger American citizens abroad or make other countries not like us so much. but it IS okay have people actually die, and of course the repercussions above, what---wont happen? You do understand, that when the US Army was patrolling the border, due to the isolationist craze in the country at the time, that anyone crossing the border illegally was, for all intents and purposes of the war department at the time, technically invading the US and subject to any 'use of force as decided by the commanding officer of the forces present at the incident.' And under international law, any country may take whatever means it feels necessary and justified to protect its sovereignty when dealing with anyone crossing said border with hostile or illegal intent. While unarmed individuals could not be considered hostile, and the criminal intent is minimal, armed drug couriers would fall under hostile with clear criminal intent to do harm. Furthermore, while the Geneva Convention considers land mines inhumane, should such mine fields be clearly marked in the appropriate languages, the fact that some idiot wonders into one after reading said warnings sort of minimizes a nation's responsibility. Finally, as for the Geneva Accords, the M2 fifty cal is, under those accords, only allowed to be used against equipment and vehicles, or any other .50 caliber weapon. However, the US Military fields .50 sniper rifles, in direct violation of said accords, and to quote a Fort Benning range instructor, "The fifty caliber can only be used against non breathing targets, such as vehicles, aircraft, belt buckles, canteens, boots, boot laces, buttons so, as long as you claim you were shooting at the items I just listed, feel free to use the belt." And while President Trump's little announcement about the moving of the Israeli embassy has won us no friends in that particular ongoing conflict, I would like to point out that nothing any previous president has done achieved much either. And since the particular bastards who will react violently are not only violating the Geneva Accords, but their own religious laws, the fact that no matter what he did, someone was going to get pissed off, and while his action may push those on the fence to the fanatic side, why bother being nice any more? The US has limited itself to 'proportional responses' to terrorist attacks, it is time to forget proportional, and go for the 'wrath of God' approach. Sooner or later some fanatic will figure out that the cost of blowing up an airplane or trying to car bomb a building is not worth a few thousand dead in return. If Allah was really on their side, Allah would not let a disproportional amount of innocents die as a result of attacking the great Satan. I mean christ, we know who most of the high ranking leaders in most terrorist groups are, where they grew up, where they had family, and there are a lot of dumb munitions that are laying around in Air Force warehouses that cost tax payer money to store, and a major B52 strike is a great start to Urban redevelopment.
_____________________________
Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think? You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of. Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI
|