guess who won't be going anywhere near Belgium in a hurry?

taranaki · #1 05-19-2003, 02:21 AM

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.../ixportal.html

Of course,no American in the history of modern warfare has ever committed a 'war crime'....

So I'm sure that the officers concerned have no reason for not taking the trouble to turn up and clear their own names.I'm sure that their expenses would be more than covered by Mr.Bush,seeing as how he didn't get invited...yet.

Jimster · #2 05-19-2003, 04:58 AM

Well it had to happen sometime- and now America is being childis about it by trying to move NATO headqaters

NSX-R-SSJ20K · #3 05-19-2003, 05:20 AM

What is it that he supposedly has done?

BigJustinZ28 · #4 05-19-2003, 03:16 PM

This is just some jackass lawyer trying to make a name for himself. This is possibly the stupidest thing I have ever heard. If he wins anything I will now consider NATO a joke. You shouldnt be arrested for showing up to a NATO meeting !!! I call BULLSHIT !!! oh yeah and I think the guy looks like Louis Anderson

And the survey says ............

J Hates Politics !!!!

YogsVR4 · #5 05-19-2003, 03:26 PM

This article doesn’t talk about just a us soldier committing a war crime. It’s a lawsuit that claims Franks alleging war crimes by a Belgian lawyer.

Quote:

He said that the accusations against Gen Franks focused on the bombing of civilian areas, "indiscriminate shooting" by US troops when they entered Baghdad, and the failure to prevent the looting of hospitals.

Christ almighty. Its be Belgian equivelent to suing McDonalds

Stupid would be an understatement.

However the following should be looked into. Although I don't think a civil lawsuit is how that should be handled.

Quote:

Mr Fermon has also charged a colonel in the US Marines with ordering troops to fire on ambulances bearing the Red Crescent symbol.

As for moving NATO out of Belgium. I think NATO has outlived its usefullness now that the Soviet Union is no more. Perhaps a different organization would emerge afterwards, but a restructuring (including the potential moving of headquarters.) Should the fact the Belgians are acting in a way that makes the US mad be the reason to move? I don’t think that’s reason enough.

Prelewd · #6 05-19-2003, 04:04 PM

Freedom waffles anyone?

Pick · #7 05-19-2003, 06:46 PM

What a load of horseshit. These damn left-wingers don't give up do they? I would love to see the evidence he has to support his accusations and why he chose Tommy Franks as his target. This guy is a damn idiot, plain and simple. I have no more patience with dipshits like him. Words are a waste.

taranaki · #8 05-20-2003, 02:07 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by YogsVR4

As for moving NATO out of Belgium. I think NATO has outlived its usefullness now that the Soviet Union is no more. Perhaps a different organization would emerge afterwards, but a restructuring (including the potential moving of headquarters.) Should the fact the Belgians are acting in a way that makes the US mad be the reason to move? I don’t think that’s reason enough.

NATO and the UN are more important than ever now that there is such an imbalance in world power.The prospect of one country flouting international law whenever it suits without any kind of checks and balances is not one that I relish.

BigJustinZ28 · #9 05-20-2003, 07:25 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by taranaki

NATO and the UN are more important than ever now that there is such an imbalance in world power.The prospect of one country flouting international law whenever it suits without any kind of checks and balances is not one that I relish.

yeah but what kind of country would ever try something like that ???

YogsVR4 · #10 05-20-2003, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by taranaki

NATO and the UN are more important than ever now that there is such an imbalance in world power.The prospect of one country flouting international law whenever it suits without any kind of checks and balances is not one that I relish.

The UN couldn't do jack shit about a two bit dictator (Amin comes to mind) What the hell are they going to do with a country that is truly powerful - say China or the US? The same thing they always do. Sit around and whine like the ineffective bureaucrats they are.

As for NATO. The purpose there was to contain the Soviet Union. Mission accomplished. Keeping an organization up and running when its primary goal has been completed seems pretty useless. If they have a new role to play then they should reorganize. Leaving troops in Germany is a waste and as far as headquarters go, its moved before.

POST REPLY TO THIS THREAD