Thread: Limbaugh: "I want Obama to fail...if he's a Socialist"

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 35 of 35
  1. #31  
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    California
    Posts
    8
    All my friends told me we need to not criticize and try to get along. "Take the high road" they said.

    I tried it. I watched to see what Obama actually DOES.

    I've seen it.

    I pray Obama FAILS at destroying our nation.

    I have never appreciated President Bush as much as I do now.

    God help us.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #32 Rush meant... 
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Nor Cal
    Posts
    8
    Rush meant that he wants the best for this country. He wants Obama's socialist/marxist policies to fail.

    ;)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #33  
    Senior Member Molon Labe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Jihad Me At Hello
    Posts
    4,746
    Quote Originally Posted by PoliCon View Post
    well now that's the crux. They have no government - they are illegal combatants so - they have to wait until we're good and ready to deal with them. I don't like this war any more than you do - but we didn't start it. We damn well better finish it - and with finality.
    Can you explain what an illegal combatant means to you? I mean....I've done alot of reading about the term and it's origins...and it seems a pretty open ended. Not to mention that most of the cases involve little or no evidence. Have you read about the legality of this? I ask this in all seriousness.
    Gun Control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her panty hose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound - Unknown


    The problem is Empty People, Not Loaded Guns - Linda Schrock Taylor
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #34  
    Senior Member Celtic Rose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Posts
    425
    Quote Originally Posted by Travis Noodle View Post
    Rush meant that he wants the best for this country. He wants Obama's socialist/marxist policies to fail.

    ;)
    Yes, which anybody with half a brain should be able to figure out.

    Socialism is not a good thing, no matter who supports it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #35  
    CU's Tallest Midget! PoliCon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Pittsburgh PA
    Posts
    25,328
    Quote Originally Posted by Molon Labe View Post
    Can you explain what an illegal combatant means to you? I mean....I've done alot of reading about the term and it's origins...and it seems a pretty open ended. Not to mention that most of the cases involve little or no evidence. Have you read about the legality of this? I ask this in all seriousness.
    http://www.icrc.org/web/eng/siteeng0...ism-ihl-210705

    Who is a combatant?


    International humanitarian law permits members of the armed forces of a State party to an international armed conflict and associated militias who fulfil the requisite criteria to directly engage in hostilities. They are generally considered lawful, or privileged, combatants who may not be prosecuted for the taking part in hostilities as long as they respect international humanitarian law. Upon capture they are entitled to prisoner of war status.

    If civilians directly engage in hostilities, they are considered "unlawful" or "unprivileged" combatants or belligerents (the treaties of humanitarian law do not expressly contain these terms). They may be prosecuted under the domestic law of the detaining state for such action.

    Both lawful and unlawful combatants may be interned in wartime, may be interrogated and may be prosecuted for war crimes. Both are entitled to humane treatment in the hands of the enemy.


    Who is entitled to "prisoner of war" status?
    What is the consequence of failure to qualify for prisoner of war status?

    a. In international armed conflict

    As previously mentioned, in international armed conflict, members of the armed forces of the States involved (and associated militias) are lawful combatants. It should be borne in mind that in this type of conflict, there are lawful combatants on two (or more) sides: the armed forces of one State fighting the armed forces of another State.

    The four Geneva Conventions apply to situations of international armed conflict. It is the Third Geneva Convention which regulates the protection of lawful combatants upon capture by the enemy. Its procedures for determination of entitlement to prisoner of war status by a "competent tribunal" in case of doubt are mandatory.

    Unlawful combatants do not qualify for prisoner of war status. Their situation upon capture by the enemy is covered by the Fourth (Civilian) Geneva Convention if they fulfil the nationality criteria and by the relevant provisions of the Additional Protocol I, if ratified by the detaining power.

    This protection is not the same as that afforded to lawful combatants. To the contrary, persons protected by the Fourth Convention and the relevant provisions of Protocol I may be prosecuted under domestic law for directly participating in hostilities. They may be interned for as long as they pose a serious security threat, and, while in detention, may under specific conditions be denied certain privileges under the Fourth Geneva Convention. They may also be prosecuted for war crimes and other crimes and sentenced to terms exceeding the length of the conflict, including the range of penalties provided for under domestic law.

    Persons not covered by either the Third or the Fourth Geneva Convention in international armed conflict are entitled to the fundamental guarantees provided for by customary international law (as reflected in Article 75 of Additional Protocol I), as well as by applicable domestic and human rights law. All these legal sources provide for rights of detainees in relation to treatment, conditions and due process of law.

    Therefore, contrary to some assertions, the ICRC has never stated that all persons who have taken part in hostilities in an international armed conflict are entitled to prisoner of war status.
    Stand up for what is right, even if you have to stand alone.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •