Staff Sgt. Bales

If a soldiers crime was covered up, how do you know about it? If you are saying that some soldiers are found innocent of a crime when YOU thought they were guilty, you were wrong.

I am an AF vet and I saw fellow airmen imprisoned for crimes that they would not even be charged with in the civilian world.

You shouldn’t have replied in such a manner. His point has nothing to do with his original claim and was made to skew the argument in a different direction. I almost made the same mistake myself but then I edited my post to bring him back.

Actually it's simply a natural evolution of the discussion, but nice attempt to dismiss the point.

The natural evolution of the discussion is to jump from the content of the original claim and debate something completely non related? So much for fact and reason of which libertarians are known for.
 
I never argue with generalizations derived from no specifics. Furthermore, dismissing a fact as an "anecdote" does nothing to support your position. Nor does asserting that cover-ups happen in the past so we are an evil country who should violate the rights of the accused by throwing them to the wolves against an internationaly sound and recognised agreement. You cannot justify a wrong with anohter wrong to acheive a political or idelogical goal. And your goal isnt as innocent as seeing that justice is served. YOU KNOW sending him before Afgans will result in a show trial. But justice isnt yuor goal. Its international appeasement. Let me guess .. your a libertarian? So am I. However, being a libertarian isnt wholly subscribing to Ron Pauls foreign policy.


I am a libertarian, and I don't know that my position on this situation has anything to do with Ron Paul's foreign policy. I've not heard Ron Paul talk about this incident at all. My position flows from the principle that you are tried where you committed the crime. This soldier committed the crime in Afghanistan against Afghanis, therefore he should be tried by an Afghan court. We're the ones who setup the new Afghan government in the first place, so why can't we trust their courts? If their courts really aren't to be trusted then why do we allow anybody to be tried by them? Surely we should be trying all alleged criminals in Afghanistan in the U.S. or in international courts if their own judicial system is no good. And if their government is incapable of handing out justice as you seem to be implying, what in the world were we doing there for the past decade?

Here's a specific example of a cover-up.

U.S.-led forces in Afghanistan are committing atrocities, lying, and getting away with it

So why do we allow anyone to be tried by them? I was unaware that they needed our permission to try anyone within their jurisdiction. And yet, you’ve failed to name a single reason why he should be tried in Afghanistan other than that’s the way you want it done. And now you’re all over the place attempting to drag me in to non-related arguments. I won’t bite. The questions are

1) Will justice be properly and objectively served by trying him in Afghanistan? ----------Absolutely not!
2) Does the US have the legal right to try him in the US? --------- Absolutely.

End of story. There is no legal recourse. Why debate it? Dont like it? Start an Afghan revolution for all I care.

:rolleyes:
 
You shouldn’t have replied in such a manner. His point has nothing to do with his original claim and was made to skew the argument in a different direction. I almost made the same mistake myself but then I edited my post to bring him back.

Actually it's simply a natural evolution of the discussion, but nice attempt to dismiss the point.

The natural evolution of the discussion is to jump from the content of the original claim and debate something completely non related? So much for fact and reason of which libertarians are known for.

Nothing to do with the subject, huh?
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top