Obama prosecutes 3 navy seals who captured terrorist

[Coyote]

Oh. Well I guess the military courts are just idiots then, right? You know more about the law than them. OBVIOUSLY US MILITARY LAW DOESN'T APPLY TO SOLDIERS OVERSEAS
...
its perfectly OK and legal to make false statements, for instance, just so long as you're overseas and at war - is that your opinion?


Just remember everyone - I'm the dumb one for suggesting laws which make it an offense to lie to your superior officers apply during war time.

Oh ... so NOW it's US military law" is it? Waste your games of semantics on someone else, huh?

That the best you can do? Intellectual dishonesty? Nice.

So let me get this straight - you're telling me U.S. military law is NOT U.S. law?

 

[SpidermanTuba]

US law does NOT apply to US military personnel deployed in combat.

Oh. Well I guess the military courts are just idiots then, right? You know more about the law than them. OBVIOUSLY US MILITARY LAW DOESN'T APPLY TO SOLDIERS OVERSEAS
...
its perfectly OK and legal to make false statements, for instance, just so long as you're overseas and at war - is that your opinion?


Just remember everyone - I'm the dumb one for suggesting laws which make it an offense to lie to your superior officers apply during war time.

Let me make this simple for you.

US Law is not military law.

US CODE: Title 50,CHAPTER 22—UNIFORM CODE OF MILITARY JUSTICE

 

[Claudette]

I also read an article on the Navy Seals.

They were the ones asking for the Court Martial. They wanted to prove that they were inocent of any wrongdoing.

They probably would have gotten a slap on the wrist from Command but they opted for the Courts Martial.

Navy SEALs Face Assault Charges for Capturing Most-Wanted Terrorist - Iraq | War | Map - FOXNews.com

I would demand a court martial. Damned straight. You're spinning out of control. Trial by court marital is a RIGHT rather than accept NJP. You can take the NJP which is basically an admission of guilt and throwing yourself at the CO's mercy.

**** THAT. You take it. If I'm in the right, I'm demanding a trial.

Try educating yourself before flapping your gums, huh?

Whoa there Gunny. I am AGREEING with you. Sorry if it didn't sound that way.

My Father spent 22 years and my brother 20 in the military. They both retirred as Sr. Master Sargeants. I can tell you there is no way iin hell either one of them would have taken a reprimand for something they didn't do. They both would have demanded a Court Martial to prove their innocence.

Those three Navy Seals are heroes in my eyes and I'm sure they will be exonerated.

 

[CrimsonWhite]

Oh. Well I guess the military courts are just idiots then, right? You know more about the law than them. OBVIOUSLY US MILITARY LAW DOESN'T APPLY TO SOLDIERS OVERSEAS
...
its perfectly OK and legal to make false statements, for instance, just so long as you're overseas and at war - is that your opinion?


Just remember everyone - I'm the dumb one for suggesting laws which make it an offense to lie to your superior officers apply during war time.

Oh ... so NOW it's US military law" is it? Waste your games of semantics on someone else, huh?

That the best you can do? Intellectual dishonesty? Nice.

So let me get this straight - you're telling me U.S. military law is NOT U.S. law?

Though it is part of the US Code, only Active duty military is subject to it. Its purpose is the fact that soldiers cannot always follow US laws in a war zone. Otherwise its existence wouldn't be necessary. Hence, the rest of the US Code does not apply in war and therefore does not apply to soldiers when in theater. They are only subject to 10 U.S.C. That is a pretty clear separation.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Yep, we should be worried about the enemies feelings.

Spoken like true asshole.

I'm sure the enemy would love it if we let our soldiers lie to their superiors in a war zone.

Clue: Who ******* cares what the enemy loves, goober? What part of this aren't you getting?

You make me sick.

Translation - "You made me look like an idiot when I said the UCMJ isn't part of U.S. Law, so rather than admit that I was wrong, I'm going to feign disgust at your very existence":

 

[Gunny]

THE UCMJ IS U.S. CODE TITLE 50 CHAPTER 22 IT IS U.S. LAW YOU ******* RETARD


US CODE: Title 50,CHAPTER 22—UNIFORM CODE OF MILITARY JUSTICE


Seriously, how can one person be this stupid?

Uh huh, because that's what your retarded ass was pushing, right? Shut up, dickhead. You got no game. Try Romperroom.com - rom per room Resources and Information.This website is for sale!. You'll find your peers there.

Is that an actual comeback or did you stub your toe on the way to the keyboard?

****, I could let my 16 months old graddaughter respond to YOUR drivel. Odd, I recall you used to have a game. Now it's just spelled with an "L" in place of the "G".

 

[Gunny]

Oh ... so NOW it's US military law" is it? Waste your games of semantics on someone else, huh?

That the best you can do? Intellectual dishonesty? Nice.

So let me get this straight - you're telling me U.S. military law is NOT U.S. law?

Try again.

 

[CrimsonWhite]

I'm sure the enemy would love it if we let our soldiers lie to their superiors in a war zone.

Clue: Who ******* cares what the enemy loves, goober? What part of this aren't you getting?

You make me sick.

Translation - "You made me look like an idiot when I said the UCMJ isn't part of U.S. Law, so rather than admit that I was wrong, I'm going to feign disgust at your very existence":

Have US Attorneys ever prosecuted crimes against Title 10?

 

[Coyote]

So let me get this straight - you're telling me U.S. military law is NOT U.S. law?

Try again.

How can he dig himself any deeper in a hole then he is already?

 

[Gunny]

I'm sure the enemy would love it if we let our soldiers lie to their superiors in a war zone.

Clue: Who ******* cares what the enemy loves, goober? What part of this aren't you getting?

You make me sick.

Translation - "You made me look like an idiot when I said the UCMJ isn't part of U.S. Law, so rather than admit that I was wrong, I'm going to feign disgust at your very existence":

Translation: you're the only idiot here, fuckwit. I'm not wrong. You are. Want to keep flailing about with a blindfold on, or what?

When you engage in trying to purposefully mislead the readers and play word games, don't get your dick all bent when the door gets slammed on it.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Oh ... so NOW it's US military law" is it? Waste your games of semantics on someone else, huh?

That the best you can do? Intellectual dishonesty? Nice.

So let me get this straight - you're telling me U.S. military law is NOT U.S. law?

Though it is part of the US Code, only Active duty military is subject to it. Its purpose is the fact that soldiers cannot always follow US laws in a war zone. Otherwise its existence wouldn't be necessary. Hence, the rest of the US Code does not apply in war and therefore does not apply to soldiers when in theater. They are only subject to 10 U.S.C. That is a pretty clear separation.

10 U.S.C. 928 Art 128 Assault
US CODE: Title 10,928. Art. 128. Assault

10 U.S.C. 907 Art 107 False official statement
US CODE: Title 10,907. Art. 107. False official statements

 

[CrimsonWhite]

So let me get this straight - you're telling me U.S. military law is NOT U.S. law?

Though it is part of the US Code, only Active duty military is subject to it. Its purpose is the fact that soldiers cannot always follow US laws in a war zone. Otherwise its existence wouldn't be necessary. Hence, the rest of the US Code does not apply in war and therefore does not apply to soldiers when in theater. They are only subject to 10 U.S.C. That is a pretty clear separation.

10 U.S.C. 928 Art 128 Assault
US CODE: Title 10,928. Art. 128. Assault

10 U.S.C. 907 Art 107 False official statement
US CODE: Title 10,907. Art. 107. False official statements

So you can use google. Good for you. What is your point?

Yes, you are correct that the UCMJ is part of the US Code. However, it applied separately and therefore is only a part of it. Any other US law cannot be enforced on soldiers in theater. That makes the UCMJ separate. It has its own court system and US Attorneys do not argue in those courts. Unless they are reservists.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Though it is part of the US Code, only Active duty military is subject to it. Its purpose is the fact that soldiers cannot always follow US laws in a war zone. Otherwise its existence wouldn't be necessary. Hence, the rest of the US Code does not apply in war and therefore does not apply to soldiers when in theater. They are only subject to 10 U.S.C. That is a pretty clear separation.

10 U.S.C. 928 Art 128 Assault
US CODE: Title 10,928. Art. 128. Assault

10 U.S.C. 907 Art 107 False official statement
US CODE: Title 10,907. Art. 107. False official statements

So you can use google. Good for you. What is your point?

You said U.S. Law doesn't apply to them. Linked is the U.S. Law that applies to them. You were wrong. Good day.

 

[Gunny]

10 U.S.C. 928 Art 128 Assault
US CODE: Title 10,928. Art. 128. Assault

10 U.S.C. 907 Art 107 False official statement
US CODE: Title 10,907. Art. 107. False official statements

So you can use google. Good for you. What is your point?

You said U.S. Law doesn't apply to them. Linked is the U.S. Law that applies to them. You were wrong. Good day.

You damned sure didn't have one. Just got spanked soundly, matter of fact. But DO carry on, fool.

 

[CMike]

Once again the liberals rush to defend their terrorist friends and once again america is the bad guys in the liberals' screwed up mind.

The seals deserve medals for capturing this vicious terrorist.

 

[CrimsonWhite]

10 U.S.C. 928 Art 128 Assault
US CODE: Title 10,928. Art. 128. Assault

10 U.S.C. 907 Art 107 False official statement
US CODE: Title 10,907. Art. 107. False official statements

So you can use google. Good for you. What is your point?

You said U.S. Law doesn't apply to them. Linked is the U.S. Law that applies to them. You were wrong. Good day.

Its cute how you conveniently ignore the parts of my posts that show you are wrong.

 

[CMike]

So let me get this straight - you're telling me U.S. military law is NOT U.S. law?

Though it is part of the US Code, only Active duty military is subject to it. Its purpose is the fact that soldiers cannot always follow US laws in a war zone. Otherwise its existence wouldn't be necessary. Hence, the rest of the US Code does not apply in war and therefore does not apply to soldiers when in theater. They are only subject to 10 U.S.C. That is a pretty clear separation.

10 U.S.C. 928 Art 128 Assault
US CODE: Title 10,928. Art. 128. Assault

10 U.S.C. 907 Art 107 False official statement
US CODE: Title 10,907. Art. 107. False official statements

It's so touching how you liberals come to the defense of a mass murdering terrorist -- again.

 

[CrimsonWhite]

Though it is part of the US Code, only Active duty military is subject to it. Its purpose is the fact that soldiers cannot always follow US laws in a war zone. Otherwise its existence wouldn't be necessary. Hence, the rest of the US Code does not apply in war and therefore does not apply to soldiers when in theater. They are only subject to 10 U.S.C. That is a pretty clear separation.

10 U.S.C. 928 Art 128 Assault
US CODE: Title 10,928. Art. 128. Assault

10 U.S.C. 907 Art 107 False official statement
US CODE: Title 10,907. Art. 107. False official statements

It's so touching how you liberals come to the defense of a mass murdering terrorist -- again.

Nah. He is just an asshole. He is too ******* dumb to be a liberal.

 

[L.K.Eder]

Once again the liberals rush to defend their terrorist friends and once again america is the bad guys in the liberals' screwed up mind.

The seals deserve medals for capturing this vicious terrorist.

you are a very small man

 

[chanel]

Let's suppose for the sake of argument THEY ARE INNOCENT. "We didn't punch him. The guy is full of shit" Do you mean to say that every bruise or scratch a detainee gets in war should be investigated and prosecuted? These guys may be getting railroaded to make some bizarre political point and perhaps that's why they've demanded a court marshall hearing. You don't accept a "slap on the wrist" when your reputation is at stake.

But I will say that even if they did hit the guy, "damn you should have shot him'