Allen West Suggests Anti-War Congressmen Should ‘Get Shot At A Few Times’

[Agorism]

Allen West Suggests Anti-War Congressmen Should ‘Get Shot At A Few Times’


http://thinkprogress.org/2011/05/26/allen-west-congressmen-shot


"But some Republicans were not pleased with the vote. Tea Party firebrand Rep. Allen West (R-FL) — a retired Army officer who was discharged after shooting at an unarmed detainee in Iraq — denounced the amendment, telling the Miami Herald that his anti-war colleagues should “get shot” to understand the true threat of the Taliban:"


“Is the Taliban still fighting? I spent 2.5 years in Afghanistan. Just because you kill Osama bin Laden does not mean that the Taliban has stopped fighting,” he said. “Now can we fight a little smarter? Absolutely.”

Asked about efforts to curb U.S. involvement, West said, “I would take these gentlemen over and let them get shot at a few times and maybe they’d have a different opinion.”-West

[AuH20]

He actually has a point in the context of combat variables, but he's still not questioning the merit of the overall operation.

[doodle]

Accused war criminal Allen West was kicked out after paying a fine after he used his gun to torture Iraqi policeman reportedly. He was accused of committing war crimes by his fellow soldiers but probably political pressure led his punishment to be reduced to just a fine with exit from military. That guy has little integrity to be speaking about this.

[AuH20]

Accused war criminal Allen West was reportedly forced out after paying a fine after he used his gun to torture Iraqis reportedly. He was accused of committing war crimes by his fellow soldiers but probably political pressure led his punishment to be reduced to just a fine with exit from military. That guy has little integrity to be speaking about this.

I don't like Allen West's politics but you're calling him a war criminal when you were miles away? I want to drop you in a hellhole like that and see how you handle yourself. The military bashing in here is on untold levels.

[Agorism]

People shouldn't sign up to kill people for the government.

[doodle]

I stated what is pretty much undisputed, his punishment was based on testimony of his fellow soldiers. By your argument criticism of those who who "vented out" at abu ghraib for being thrown into a "hell hole" would be not ok?
It's not a sound argument. In fact those who commit such violations bring bad name for others who serve with honor.

[AuH20]

People shouldn't sign up to kill people for the government.

Agreed, especially when these wars have no endgame. But by the same token, I'm going to judge an individual for attempting to procure valuable intel, absent of raping and pillaging, when they have a literal bullseye on their back 24 hours a day.

[NewRightLibertarian]

I don't like Allen West's politics but you're calling him a war criminal when you were miles away? I want to drop you in a hellhole like that and see how you handle yourself. The military bashing in here is on untold levels.

I don't blame people for bashing the military. When you see instance of torture, brutal murder, soldiers posing next to dead bodies like they're trophies, etc., you begin to sense a pattern, and it is perfectly natural to be angry at these war crimes that are endemic of our military. Everyone here supports the troops by wanting to see them come home. I don't think anyone here thinks every serviceman is evil, but undoubtedly some of them are. They dehumanize the troops and turn them into savages so they'll kill for no good reason like they have been for many years.

[pcosmar]

I don't like Allen West's politics but you're calling him a war criminal when you were miles away? I want to drop you in a hellhole like that and see how you handle yourself. The military bashing in here is on untold levels.

OK . I'm a Vet. And his actions were against everything we were taught and trained for. He acted in direct violations of the KNOWN and Accepted rules and Code of Conduct.
He is worthy of NOTHING but contempt, Especially from anyone that has ever served.

[RM918]

I was more thinking the Pro-war congressmen should have to live in a village where the CIA is drone-bombing them, then maybe they'd reconsider.

[AuH20]

OK . I'm a Vet. And his actions were against everything we were taught and trained for. He acted in direct violations of the KNOWN and Accepted rules and Code of Conduct.
He is worthy of NOTHING but contempt, Especially from anyone that has ever served.

With all due respect, that's largely semantics. The so-called Code of Conduct will get you killed, especially in a theater of operations where the enemy doesn't wear a uniform. Let me reiterate, that I'm not an advocate for any of these imperialist misadventures, but I'm certainly not going to judge Allen West when he takes it upon himself to defend himself as well as the lives of his unit.

[AuH20]

I don't blame people for bashing the military. When you see instance of torture, brutal murder, soldiers posing next to dead bodies like they're trophies, etc., you begin to sense a pattern, and it is perfectly natural to be angry at these war crimes that are endemic of our military. Everyone here supports the troops by wanting to see them come home. I don't think anyone here thinks every serviceman is evil, but undoubtedly some of them are. They dehumanize the troops and turn them into savages so they'll kill for no good reason like they have been for many years.

Of course, there are bad apples. The military likes sociopaths who have a lust for violence. But conversely, there are situations where you have to bend the rules. I would shoot off a live round near the head of a apprehended insurgent, if it meant a greater condition of security for my team. Absolutely. Then again, I would never be there to begin with.

[TheDrakeMan]

Iraq and Afghanistan are hardly hellholes.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

With all due respect, that's largely semantics. The so-called Code of Conduct will get you killed, especially in a theater of operations where the enemy doesn't wear a uniform. Let me reiterate, that I'm not an advocate for any of these imperialist misadventures, but I'm certainly not going to judge Allen West when he takes it upon himself to defend himself as well as the lives of his unit.

I'm sorry, but this is complete bullshit. Perhaps I'm an old fashioned Southerner in the vein of Robert E. Lee, but there is damn well a Code of Conduct and a honorable way to fight a war.

Just because it is War does not give carte blanche to those in the theatre. It is absolutely wrong how Allen West acted. Anyone not opposed to his actions, well, I do not want to associate myself with.

[pcosmar]

With all due respect, that's largely semantics. The so-called Code of Conduct will get you killed, especially in a theater of operations where the enemy doesn't wear a uniform. Let me reiterate, that I'm not an advocate for any of these imperialist misadventures, but I'm certainly not going to judge Allen West when he takes it upon himself to defend himself as well as the lives of his unit.

He tortured prisoners. Disarmed and in custody.
In violation of international agreements, Military Code, and common decency.

The fact that he was able to be elected shows just how degraded politics and morals in this country have gotten.

[Agorism]

Well he obviously hasn't learned anything since he thinks the antiwar congressman may need to get shot to fix their opinions.

[AuH20]

He tortured prisoners. Disarmed and in custody.
In violation of international agreements, Military Code, and common decency.

The fact that he was able to be elected shows just how degraded politics and morals in this country have gotten.

I'm sure his prisoners would afford him the same "humanitarian" consideration. This hypothetical moral equivalence we're conjuring up here sounds politically correct in the confines of our safe living rooms, but it leads to a grisly end. This is the reason why war should be averted at all costs because, aside from the obvious atrocities which can perpetrated, there is no black and white.

[doodle]

AuH20, a question for you. Has there been any conduct by anyone in Iraq/Afghanistan ( abu ghraib, hadita, afghan torture cases) in last 8 years that you see worthy of any condemnation?

[Agorism]

I'm sure his prisoners would afford him the same "humanitarian" consideration. This hypothetical moral equivalence we're conjuring up here sounds politically correct in the confines of our safe living rooms, but it leads to a grisly end. This is the reason why war should be averted at all costs because, aside from the obvious atrocities which can perpetrated, there is no black and white.

If they don't want to be put in that situation....don't sign up.

[AuH20]

AuH20, a question for you. Has there been any conduct by anyone in Iraq/Afghanistan ( abu ghraib, hadita, afghan torture cases) in last 8 years that you see worthy of any condemnation?

Of course. Abu Ghraib, the helicopter killings Bradley Manning leaked, the bombing of women and children at that wedding in Uruzagan. I'm not going to make excuses for wanton violence on behalf of the empire.

[AuH20]

If they don't want to be put in that situation....don't sign up.

Well said. It's not as glamorous as those commercials would lead one to believe.

[Verrater]

Just because it is War does not give carte blanche to those in the theatre. It is absolutely wrong how Allen West acted. Anyone not opposed to his actions, well, I do not want to associate myself with.

+1
Who we are as a nation can be determined by examining how we act during war.




'Treat them with humanity, and let them have no reason to complain of our copying the brutal example of the British Army in their treatment of our unfortunate brethren who have fallen into their hands,' he wrote.

In all respects the prisoners were to be treated no worse than American soldiers; and in some respects, better. Through this approach, Washington sought to shame his British adversaries, and to demonstrate the moral superiority of the American cause.

[pcosmar]

Of course. Abu Ghraib, the helicopter killings Bradley Manning leaked, the bombing of women and children at that wedding in Uruzagan. I'm not going to make excuses for wanton violence on behalf of the empire.

And yet you are in this thread. You are justifying torture of prisoners by a criminal who was later elected, and is now spewing garbage for political purposes.

btw, The helicopter footage was not Bradley Manning, but another anonymous patriot.

[specsaregood]

./

[doodle]

Of course. Abu Ghraib, the helicopter killings Bradley Manning leaked, the bombing of women and children at that wedding in Uruzagan. I'm not going to make excuses for wanton violence on behalf of the empire.

So how would you respond to someone if they said these were basically ill trained young men and women thrown into the hell hole ( which was at least partly true in some cases at least) and were just letting some steam off?

WASHINGTON, May 6, 2004
Rush: MPs Just 'Blowing Off Steam'
Limbaugh: Abuse Story 'Media-Generated': CBS' Meyer Says Beware

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/05/06/opinion/meyer/main616021.shtml

Clearly there are various grades of war crimes but Allen West supports the war and has supported others accused of much more serious war crimes. He was a senior officer, not some kid thrown into a war. He takes pride in his treatment of Iraqis.

[AuH20]

So how would you respond to someone if they said these were basically ill trained young men and women thrown into the hell hole ( which was at least partly true in some cases at least) and were just letting some steam off?

WASHINGTON, May 6, 2004
Rush: MPs Just 'Blowing Off Steam'
Limbaugh: Abuse Story 'Media-Generated': CBS' Meyer Says Beware

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/05/06/opinion/meyer/main616021.shtml

Clearly there are various grades of war crimes but Allen West supports the war and has supported others accused of much more serious war crimes. He was a senior officer, not some kid thrown into a war. He takes pride in his treatment of Iraqis.

He fired off a round near the head of a detainee in a hot zone. Aside from soiled undergarments and a sore eardrum, a classification of a war crime is a bit much. Hell, the military has a ridiculous clause in their sacred "code" that you cannot discharge your weapon until being "officially" fired upon. How many conscientious objectors in here would adhere to this insanity if they were conscripted into backwater duty? By all means, we'd all be "war criminals" by these broad parameters.

[LisaNY]

Well he obviously hasn't learned anything since he thinks the antiwar congressman may need to get shot to fix their opinions.

I hope they check this psycho for firearms before he enters the house floor - I don't trust loose cannons like West

[Invi]

Somehow, I don't think being shot at is going to make anti-war congressman any less anti-war. :-/
"Oh yeah, man, that was exciting! Let's do it again! Forever!"

[pcosmar]

a classification of a war crime is a bit much.

No.
It is NOT.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crime

War crimes are serious violations of the laws applicable in armed conflict (Also known as International humanitarian law) giving rise to individual criminal responsibility. Examples of such conduct includes "murder, the ill-treatment or deportation of civilian residents of an occupied territory to slave labor camps", "the murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war", the killing of prisoners, "the wanton destruction of cities, towns and villages, and any devastation not justified by military, or civilian necessity"

[GuerrillaXXI]

Asked about efforts to curb U.S. involvement, West said, “I would take these gentlemen over and let them get shot at a few times and maybe they’d have a different opinion.”-WestWest is obviously not too bright. What he said here is a complete non sequitur. Why should getting shot at in a war zone change someone's opinion from anti-war to pro-war? If anything, I'd expect it to reinforce an anti-war outlook. And above all, US soldiers wouldn't be getting shot at if they weren't invading and occupying foreign countries.


I don't like Allen West's politics but you're calling him a war criminal when you were miles away? I want to drop you in a hellhole like that and see how you handle yourself. The military bashing in here is on untold levels.Actually, yes, I'm calling him a war criminal when I was miles away. No one dropped Allen West into any hellhole -- he chose that himself. Also, since not all soldiers commit atrocities while they're in a combat zone, it's pretty clear that being in that situation doesn't force anyone to commit atrocities. The same principle is at work elsewhere: e.g., the stress of being diagnosed with a terminal illness doesn't force anyone to become a murderer, and being born into poverty or being raised by bad parents doesn't force anyone to become a serial rapist. Whatever happened to personal responsibility? If a person isn't mentally retarded or psychotic, he is always responsible for his own actions.

[thehungarian]

From what I know of the West discharge story he fired a shot near the Iraqi police officer's head to scare him. I would be more concerned with his soldiers beating him beforehand than the fake-shooting, but that would also be a product of the leader(West) I suppose.

To call him a "war criminal" seems absurd to me.

[AuH20]

Actually, yes, I'm calling him a war criminal when I was miles away. No one dropped Allen West into any hellhole -- he chose that himself. Also, since not all soldiers commit atrocities while they're in a combat zone, it's pretty clear that being in that situation doesn't force anyone to commit atrocities. The same principle is at work elsewhere: e.g., the stress of being diagnosed with a terminal illness doesn't force anyone to become a murderer, and being born into poverty or being raised by bad parents doesn't force anyone to become a serial rapist. Whatever happened to personal responsibility? If a person isn't mentally retarded or psychotic, he is always responsible for his own actions.

He fired off a round near the head of a detainee. That man in question is still walking around, no worse for wear after his encounter with West. I laugh at this unrealistic definition of "war crime" in the context of a hot zone. A war crime is indiscriminately mowing down civilians with a .50 caliber. Or brutally raping female insurgents.

[pcosmar]

From what I know of the West discharge story he fired a shot near the Iraqi police officer's head to scare him. I would be more concerned with his soldiers beating him beforehand than the fake-shooting, but that would also be a product of the leader(West) I suppose.

To call him a "war criminal" seems absurd to me.

Perhaps you need to actually read the definition of War Crime.

What he did IS that definition.
"ill-treatment of prisoners of war",
That is a war crime.

[thehungarian]

Perhaps you need to actually read the definition of War Crime.

What he did IS that definition.
"ill-treatment of prisoners of war",
That is a war crime.

So what should his punishment have been? Hanging?

[pcosmar]

So what should his punishment have been? Hanging?

Court martial. Striped of Rank. possible incarceration. Dishonorable discharge.

Certainly not promoted to a position of power or influence.

[pcosmar]

He fired off a round near the head of a detainee. That man in question is still walking around, no worse for wear after his encounter with West. I laugh at this unrealistic definition of "war crime" in the context of a hot zone. A war crime is indiscriminately mowing down civilians with a .50 caliber. Or brutally raping female insurgents.

Not according to Laws or Conventions.
http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/instree/y3gctpw.htm

1. Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.

To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:

(a) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;

As an officer he would have known this. And known that his actions were in direct violation.

[LibertyEagle]

Uh, guys, are we trying to get Ron Paul the Republican nomination? Because if we are, I'm thinkin' anything approaching bashing of our soldiers really needs to be taken elsewhere.

Please, let's not run off potential voters.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Uh, guys, are we trying to get Ron Paul the Republican nomination? Because if we are, I'm thinkin' anything approaching bashing of our soldiers really needs to be taken elsewhere.

Please, let's not run off potential voters.

Ah, yes, in the Warfare State any criticism of its imperial troops is off-limits no matter how disgusting and immoral their behavior and actions. Even Vets or AD are disbarred from making any comments other than the complete and utter adornment of the troops and the imperial wars. Sounds like Starship Troopers to me -- blech.

[JK/SEA]

Allen West has a childs mentality. He is just a bully. What makes or turns people/children into bullies?...i'll leave that to a ceritfied mental health professional. Bottomline: West is an asshole, until further notice.

[XTreat]

I am not particularly happy with some of the anti-military talk on here either sometimes. Truth is the neocons you guys (and myself) hate so much worship the ground we vets walk on. I have a much better chance of convincing grandma Sarah Palin supporter to vote for RP simply by my service. I didn't join the war to fight in Iraq or torture anyone, I joined to support and defend the Constitution and the American way of life. I don't know a single person who joined to kill people.

[Napoleon's Shadow]

Agreed, especially when these wars have no endgame. But by the same token, I'm going to judge an individual for attempting to procure valuable intel, absent of raping and pillaging, when they have a literal bullseye on their back 24 hours a day.
Didn't they take an oath to uphold the Constitution? And wouldn't you say that the invasion of Iraq is unconstitutional?

[pcosmar]

Uh, guys, are we trying to get Ron Paul the Republican nomination? Because if we are, I'm thinkin' anything approaching bashing of our soldiers really needs to be taken elsewhere.

Please, let's not run off potential voters.

This is NOT "bashing our soldiers".
This is calling a War criminal a War Criminal.

Ron Paul does not support Torture, or violations of the Genevia Convention.

Saying that Allen West is a War Criminal is not "Bashing the Soldiers".
It is a statement of fact, backed by references.

I seriously question those that would defend a War Criminal or support him.

[JK/SEA]

I am not particularly happy with some of the anti-military talk on here either sometimes. Truth is the neocons you guys (and myself) hate so much worship the ground we vets walk on. I have a much better chance of convincing grandma Sarah Palin supporter to vote for RP simply by my service. I didn't join the war to fight in Iraq or torture anyone, I joined to support and defend the Constitution and the American way of life. I don't know a single person who joined to kill people.

Defending the Constitution means signing up to fight in an un-declared war?...

[payme_rick]

“Is the Taliban still fighting? I spent 2.5 years in Afghanistan. Just because you kill Osama bin Laden does not mean that the Taliban has stopped fighting,” he said. “Now can we fight a little smarter? Absolutely.”



I don't think we need to be talking about this guy's war crime... he did whatever he did whether you feel it is a crime or not... What is important here is the quote above and its context: the dude wants to keep the war going...

Not at all shocked that this is Beck's guy...

[LibertyEagle]

This is NOT "bashing our soldiers".
This is calling a War criminal a War Criminal.

Ron Paul does not support Torture, or violations of the Genevia Convention.

This IS.

People shouldn't sign up to kill people for the government.

Think of this forum as one big commercial for electing Ron Paul as President. Then consider whether what is being pushed will attract or run off Republican VOTERS.

[payme_rick]

Defending the Constitution means signing up to fight in an un-declared war?...

He actually said in the post you quoted that "I didn't join the war to fight in Iraq..." so I don't think that's what he thinks it means...

[pcosmar]

This IS.

People shouldn't sign up to kill people for the government.

Think of this forum as one big commercial for electing Ron Paul as President. Then consider whether what is being pushed will attract or run off Republican VOTERS.

I have no problem with that statement. People should be joining a local militia or forming one.
Also an Idea that Ron Paul supports.

I refuse to cater to the likes of Allen West or those that would encourage this kind of violent megalomaniac.

[AuH20]

I have no problem with that statement. People should be joining a local militia or forming one.
Also an Idea that Ron Paul supports.

I refuse to cater to the likes of Allen West or those that would encourage this kind of violent megalomaniac.

I prefer the term "violent megalomaniac" as opposed to "war criminal."

[XTreat]

He actually said in the post you quoted that "I didn't join the war to fight in Iraq..." so I don't think that's what he thinks it means...

I actually mistyped I meant to say "I didn't join the Army to fight in Iraq", I actually enlisted before 9/11.

[specsaregood]

./

[doodle]

I'd just like to bring this thread back to:

Dr. Paul is quite possibly the most visible/well-known war-critic in the nation right now. Because of this, West no less than suggested that Dr. Paul (a military man himself) needs to be shot at in order to change his mind and start promoting wars.

I think that ^ is the message to take from this thread/OP.

AW is a nut.

[pcosmar]

I'd just like to bring this thread back to:

Dr. Paul is quite possibly the most visible/well-known war-critic in the nation right now. Because of this, West no less than suggested that Dr. Paul (a military man himself) needs to be shot at in order to change his mind and start promoting wars.

I think that ^ is the message to take from this thread/OP.

That IS what he is sayin'.
And folks want to jump in and defend this piece of shit.
:(

[AuH20]

That IS what he is sayin'.
And folks want to jump in and defend this piece of shit.
:(

We take exception to the ridiculousness of labeling him a bonafide "war criminal." I have no problem with others ridiculing him within the confines of the political realm. But I'm not going to sit here silent as the man is unfairly slandered.

[doodle]

AuH20, he was accused of war crimes..and that was what was stated, I don't see him being called "bonafide war criminal".

pcosmar's charcterization of him seems to fit.

[pcosmar]

We take exception to the ridiculousness of labeling him a bonafide "war criminal." I have no problem with others ridiculing him within the confines of the political realm. But I'm not going to sit here silent as the man is unfairly slandered.
A had addressed that citing the definition of a "War Crime" and The violation that he committed.
I provided the text of the Convention he violated.

The fact that he avoided trial and conviction due to political influence and a special deal does not change the fact that he committed a crime.
A War Crime. By definition. He is a War Criminal.

[AuH20]

AuH20, he was accused of war crimes..and that was what was stated, I don't see him being called "bonafide war criminal".

pcosmar's charcterization of him seems to fit.

But you must understand the power of words. War criminal almost implies that he's participated in a crime in the scope of My Lai. I think we have to be very careful when we attack the opposition because sometimes there is an almost subconscious effort to project an extremely unfavorable image of those who we disagree with. I honestly don't know if Allen West is a monster. But what I have unearthed from his case file, is that the incident he was involved with is superficial at best.

[Pericles]

Accused war criminal Allen West was kicked out after paying a fine after he used his gun to torture Iraqis reportedly. He was accused of committing war crimes by his fellow soldiers but probably political pressure led his punishment to be reduced to just a fine with exit from military. That guy has little integrity to be speaking about this.

I'm calling you out.

There was one incident - not repeated torture. He fired one round in the direction of a detainee, who then gave up the location of the IED which would have been used to cause death or injury to US soldiers. He has not denied doing this.

Your statements that he repeatedly tortured Iraqis and Was accused of commiting war crime by other soldiers have no basis in fact - source it or STFU.

[Pericles]

No.
It is NOT.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crime
Just a note that detainees are not "prisoners of war" under the terms of the Geneva Conventions - they are "protected persons" until their status is determined as to whether they qualify for treatment as "spies and saboteurs", who depending on the laws of the country in which tha act takes place, could be executed upon conviction at trial.

[doodle]

There was one incident - not repeated torture.

I have edited to changes the victim to Iraqi policeman in that post but AW was accused of multiple crimes by his own admission:


In testimony at an Article 32 hearing -- the military's version of a grand jury or preliminary hearing -- West said the policeman, Yahya Jhrodi Hamoody, was not cooperating with interrogators, so he watched four of his soldiers from the 220th Field Artillery Battalion beat the detainee on the head and body.

West said he also threatened to kill Hamoody. Military prosecutors say West followed up on that threat by taking the suspect outside, put him on the ground near a weapons clearing barrel and fired his 9 mm pistol into the barrel.

The guy is an accused war criminal. Now if you can challange it, source your claim or stop defending this low level neocon.

[Cutlerzzz]

...

[pcosmar]

Just a note that detainees are not "prisoners of war" under the terms of the Geneva Conventions - they are "protected persons" until their status is determined as to whether they qualify for treatment as "spies and saboteurs", who depending on the laws of the country in which tha act takes place, could be executed upon conviction at trial.

Detainees are protected under the convention.

http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/instree/y3gctpw.htm


Article 3

In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:

1. Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.

To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:

(a) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;

(b) Taking of hostages;

(c) Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment;

(d) The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.

2. The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for.

An impartial humanitarian body, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, may offer its services to the Parties to the conflict.

The Parties to the conflict should further endeavour to bring into force, by means of special agreements, all or part of the other provisions of the present Convention.

The application of the preceding provisions shall not affect the legal status of the Parties to the conflict.


Article 4

A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy:

1. Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.

2. Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions:

Are others having trouble with the English language.?
It seems VERY clear and plain to me.

[Pericles]

I have edited to changes it to Iraqi policeman but he was accused of multiple crimes:



The guy is an accused war criminal. Now if you can challange it, source your claim or stop defending this low level neocon.

This confirms West's account that after the incident, he turned himself in to his brigade commander, surrendered his weapon and placed himself under arrest. He knew his actions were contrary to law and regulation, but committed the act in order to exercise his other responsibility as a commander - protection of his soldiers and negating threats to their lives.

He could have easily "kneecapped" the guy like the IRA did to snitches, or any other thing of lasting physical damage, but used the minimum threatening behavior to get information out of the guy.

Technically, he is not a war criminal because of no conviction in a court of law, but he is a self admitted violator of the rules of war.

[thehungarian]

The term war criminal has such a terrible stigma attached to it nowadays that when someone thinks "war criminal" they think of Stalin, the SS, Goebbles, Hitler, Che and all the rest. People think violent murdering psychopaths when they think war criminal. He may be, by definition, a war criminal, but there is a much more accurate term and that is bully. West is a bully, nothing more.

[Pericles]

Detainees are protected under the convention.

http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/instree/y3gctpw.htm





Are others having trouble with the English language.?
It seems VERY clear and plain to me.

Except that this "policeman" was taking part in hostilities by assisting in the placement of an IED, which falls outside the scope of Article 3 (1).

That is why he was detained in the first place.

[thehungarian]

Are others having trouble with the English language.?
It seems VERY clear and plain to me.

So, basically every single person in theatre right now could be a war criminal. You could push someone to the ground and that could be "mistreatment". War criminal. Punch someone in the face? War criminal. Didn't get a bottle of water? That's cruel, so war criminal.

[pcosmar]

Except that this "policeman" was taking part in hostilities by assisting in the placement of an IED, which falls outside the scope of Article 3 (1).

That is why he was detained in the first place.
Article 4

The fact that he was detained puts him under protection,,regardless.

As to "War Crimes",,I posted the definition (from Wiki, but accurate)

Just because someone escapes prosecution due to legal manipulation does not change the fact.

I am a Bank Robber. Just because I was charged and convicted of "armed robbery", rather than "Bank Robbery" does not change the fact.

[pcosmar]

So, basically every single person in theatre right now could be a war criminal. You could push someone to the ground and that could be "mistreatment". War criminal. Punch someone in the face? War criminal. Didn't get a bottle of water? That's cruel, so war criminal.

No, but it does apply to,

1. Persons taking no active part in the hostilities,

Do you have trouble reading as well?

[Brett85]

Allen West has a very strange combination of views. He votes against the Patriot Act, and then he makes a statement like this. So I guess we can call him a neo-libertarian?

[low preference guy]

Allen West has a very strange combination of views. He votes against the Patriot Act, and then he makes a statement like this. So I guess we can call him a neo-libertarian?

I prefer libercon

[Wren]

Allen West has a very strange combination of views. He votes against the Patriot Act, and then he makes a statement like this. So I guess we can call him a neo-libertarian?

I assume he was most likely pressured by his constituents this time around. He voted for it last time it came up for extension, it'll be interesting to see how he votes in the future

[doodle]

Allen West has a very strange combination of views. He votes against the Patriot Act, and then he makes a statement like this. So I guess we can call him a neo-libertarian?

He had called Obama "low level socialist", he could be afraid that Obama might use PA against him while he conducts rallies in support of occupations, torture, ethnic cleansing etc.
The guys sounds mentally incoherent or just playing the game to gulp up political support from dim witted pro war neocon/evanagie women swooning over his idiotic rhetoric mixed with ancient medieval dogmas.

[Pericles]

Article 4

The fact that he was detained puts him under protection,,regardless.

As to "War Crimes",,I posted the definition (from Wiki, but accurate)

Just because someone escapes prosecution due to legal manipulation does not change the fact.

I am a Bank Robber. Just because I was charged and convicted of "armed robbery", rather than "Bank Robbery" does not change the fact.

This is the relevant text:

Art. 5 Where in the territory of a Party to the conflict, the latter is satisfied that an individual protected person is definitely suspected of or engaged in activities hostile to the security of the State, such individual person shall not be entitled to claim such rights and privileges under the present Convention as would, if exercised in the favour of such individual person, be prejudicial to the security of such State.

Where in occupied territory an individual protected person is detained as a spy or saboteur, or as a person under definite suspicion of activity hostile to the security of the Occupying Power, such person shall, in those cases where absolute military security so requires, be regarded as having forfeited rights of communication under the present Convention.

In each case, such persons shall nevertheless be treated with humanity and, in case of trial, shall not be deprived of the rights of fair and regular trial prescribed by the present Convention. They shall also be granted the full rights and privileges of a protected person under the present Convention at the earliest date consistent with the security of the State or Occupying Power, as the case may be.

Which I am not saying that this was not violated - it was. But under the terms of the conventions, West's actions do not constitute a "grave breach", which is the standard required to be a "war criminal".

We expect public officials to be correct in all of their dealings with us. We should be no less correct in making accusations of wrongdoing.

[Napoleon's Shadow]

Uh, guys, are we trying to get Ron Paul the Republican nomination? Because if we are, I'm thinkin' anything approaching bashing of our soldiers really needs to be taken elsewhere.

Please, let's not run off potential voters.They are not "our" soldiers, they are the government's soldiers. Important distinction.

[squarepusher]

I don't like Allen West's politics but you're calling him a war criminal when you were miles away? I want to drop you in a hellhole like that and see how you handle yourself. The military bashing in here is on untold levels.

Volunteer army means he chose to get dropped in that hellhole. Can no longer use the draft excuse "my country made me do it"

[doodle]

I'd just like to bring this thread back to:

Dr. Paul is quite possibly the most visible/well-known war-critic in the nation right now. Because of this, West no less than suggested that Dr. Paul (a military man himself) needs to be shot at in order to change his mind and start promoting wars.

I think that ^ is the message to take from this thread/OP.

That IS what he is sayin'.
And folks want to jump in and defend this piece of shit.
:(


That is what he seems to be saying.

[thetruthhurtsthefed]

Agreed, especially when these wars have no endgame. But by the same token, I'm going to judge an individual for attempting to procure valuable intel, absent of raping and pillaging, when they have a literal bullseye on their back 24 hours a day.

Isn't that the reason army personnel go to trial in the Hague for war crimes? Poor argument. If you stick by your argument then release everyone who has been found guilty of war crimes simply for "procuring valuable intel" excuses.

[Napoleon's Shadow]

Volunteer army means he chose to get dropped in that hellhole. Can no longer use the draft excuse "my country made me do it"Please substitute the word "country" with "government" for a more accurate statement.