Now does everyone understand why the "right to refuse illegal orders" video was made?

[durangodawood]

Do you believe JAG?

I dont not trust them over my own eyes and reasoning, especially when the question concerns their superiors.

 

[comana]

What planet have you been on for the last ten years? Impeachments, lawfare, assassination attempts. You are probably amazed he us still standing after all of this but no previous president in our lifetime time has endured such vitriol.

And no previous president in our lifetime has dished out such vitriol and he is only getting worse.

 

[Bradskii]

I was just exposing the flaws in your dramatic response.

Well, let's take the drama out of it. We'll just state the facts plainly and simply:

The two men we're talking about weren't in a boat.
The two men were floundering around in the water.
They were hanging on to a wrecked boat.
They did that for an hour.
People at a distance watched them do that for an hour.
Someone then decided to kill them.

Is that undramatic enough for you? Does that make it any easier for you to support it? Hey, I know...let's change the environment. But the same principles. The same moral position.

The two men we're talking about weren't in a truck.
The two men were crawling around on the road.
Next to a wrecked truck.
They did that for an hour.
People at a distance watched them do that for an hour.
Someone then decided to kill them.

If the first scenario is ok with you then the second should be as well.

 

[Bradskii]

When perps are in the act of committing [Schedule I] drug trafficking, the perp is responsible for all casualties which occur in that satanic process.

Then you're fine with killing drug dealers whenever they're driving across town to deliver drugs. Heck they don't even need to be driving. They can be walking down the street according to your inane position and gunned down without warning.

What exactly is the type of country you want to live in?

 

[RDKirk]

Well, let's take the drama out of it. We'll just state the facts plainly and simply:

The two men we're talking about weren't in a boat.
The two men were floundering around in the water.
They were hanging on to a wrecked boat.
They did that for an hour.
People at a distance watched them do that for an hour.
Someone then decided to kill them.

Is that undramatic enough for you? Does that make it any easier for you to support it? Hey, I know...let's change the environment. But the same principles. The same moral position.

The two men we're talking about weren't in a truck.
The two men were crawling around on the road.
Next to a wrecked truck.
They did that for an hour.
People at a distance watched them do that for an hour.
Someone then decided to kill them.

If the first scenario is ok with you then the second should be as well.

This is where we have to make note of the separate developments of the laws of land warfare and the laws of sea warfare.

It's very conceivable that the two men on the road would get help. It's a road, after all, and both their chances of extended survival and rescue are fairly high.

OTOH, for men at sea, the chances of extended survival and rescue are close to nil.

 

[Bradskii]

So please forgive me sir, as I work hard locating my compassion like you have for the perps. So far, I've been unsuccessful in my search.

Well, lucky you. You're actually on a Christian site, so someone may be along shortly to help you with that.

 

[Bradskii]

Apparently now calling for help when shipwrecked and floating in cold water is a hostile action.

'Sir, direct it. Mission accomplished'.
'Hang on, are those two men in the water? They may be calling for help'
'Sir, the boat is a flaming wreck'
'But what if they do call for help and other drug runners turn up?'
'Umm, then I guess we blow them up as well, sir'
'Well, look - I'm going for lunch. Keep an eye on them and if they haven't drowned by the time I get back..'
'Yes sir?'
'Kill them'.

 

[Bradskii]

This is where we have to make note of the separate developments of the laws of land warfare and the laws of sea warfare.

I appreciate that. Obviously there is a difference. Which I'm highlighting. Because we've now got to the point where people are saying that people dealing in drugs should be summarily killed. And survivors of any action executed. Period. If that's the case then why differentiate between them being on a boat off Venezuela or in the harbour at Boston, in a truck driving I90 or walking across town?

 

[Say it aint so]

Which honey bunny - is not what the JAG officer said, nor the Navel Commander, nor the Secretary of War nor Admiral Bailey - head of the joint Special Operations Command.

Thanks for the link providing the information from the head of Joint Special Operations Command - the person who would know the most of what is and is not legal.

Rumer has it - he knows even more than posters on an internet forum!

Let me understand this. The JAG officer said the very example of what is illegal as used in the military code training, is not illegal.
There is a reason why the Trump admin purged JAG officers who they thought would be an obstruction. You know, as in those clearing their throats to speak up when things are illegal.

 

[Hank77]

My understanding is that the survivors were trying to access another vessel. But as in any military or police operation, munitions firing is carried out to ensure complete safety. I.e. it's not a quota of shots & you're done.

If that were true, the Navy would have just blown up the second vessel to ensure complete safety.

 

[Hank77]

BTW - I'm not a dude - I don't work on a horse ranch

That sounds like a line said by a city slicker in a comedy movie.

 

[RDKirk]

If that were true, the Navy would have just blown up the second vessel to ensure complete safety.

I mentioned that myself.

 

[FreeinChrist]

ADVISOR HAT

This thread had a clean up .

Please do not flame or post off topic. ​

 

[NxNW]

But they were not "clinging to flotsam - floating in a life boat - or in freezing waters" - they got back into the boat and it was determined their actions were effectively re-engaging.

Looks like they were surrendering.

 

[NxNW]

What planet have you been on for the last ten years? Impeachments, lawfare, assassination attempts.

The assassination attempt was by a Republican. There was no lawfare. He was convicted of fraud and found liable for assault.

You are probably amazed he us still standing after all of this but no previous president in our lifetime time has endured such vitriol.

Trump is a rapist and a fraud, and he brought all on himself.

 

[Factotum]

...What exactly is the type of country you want to live in?

I need the most available vital info in order to fairly answer fatuous questions, sir.

oh yeah
btw

In that example, will your drug trafficking perp be "walking down the street" to go deliver enough Schedule 1 drugs to kill multitudes of Americans?

 

[Factotum]

Well, lucky you. You're actually on a Christian site, so someone may be along shortly to help you with that.

Yes sir, you did come along shortly to help. Thank you!

 

[Bradskii]

I need the most available vital info in order to fairly answer fatuous questions, sir.

oh yeah
btw

In that example, will your drug trafficking perp be "walking down the street" to go deliver enough Schedule 1 drugs to kill multitudes of Americans?

I read a book a few weeks ago called One Second After. It's about what happens in the US, primarily in one small town, when some unamed enemy sets off a number of Electro Magnetic Pulse weapons over the country. All electrics are fried. So next to no transport, lighting, power, comms...almost everything is dead.

It is chilling how convincing the collapse in 'civilised' behaviour is portrayed and the rule of law goes out of the window. New rules are the norm. Brutal laws. Severe punishments. People who were upstanding members of the community revert to being judge, jury and executioner.

In one case a couple of relatively young guys are caught stealing and dealing drugs. Their 'trial' lasts a few minutes. The sentence is carried out when they are dragged out to the local basketball court and shot in the head in front of cheering God fearin' town folk.

I was honestly chilled reading that at the time at how society can revert to carrying out such barbaric acts so quickly. It's positively medieval.

You're already there, my friend.

 

[Factotum]

Those pirates, drug runners, et cetera, are considered "unprivileged belligerents." ... The law is what the law is, and this is what the law is:

Yes, I agree with that premise.
Can you tell me how you process that when "the law is" consisting of our Dept's of State/Treasury/Justice legally classifying those unpriviled belligerents as terrorists?

 

[RDKirk]

Yes, I agree with that premise.
Can you tell me how you process that when "the law is" consisting of our Dept's of State/Treasury/Justice legally classifying those unpriviled belligerents as terrorists?

Terrorists are classified as "unprivileged belligerents." I quoted what the law says about how they should be handled. The only difference is that they may be bound for trial rather than held as prisoners of war.

What are you asking?