Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ArtificialOne
Killing them for me isn't retribution. Killing them will keep them from killing more of us and more people who don't follow their form of thinking. I'm not talking about going to demonstrations or braking down doors and dragging them out to shoot them, I'm talking about the ones actually caught in the act while in action. For other ones we have the UCMJ and other guidelines to follow and that shouldn't be messed with by a bunch of do gooder make me feel goods who aren't in the theater(battlefield). Also, the Geneva convention is seriously out of date to deal with these people. It never envisioned an act like 9/11 and the consequences.
As far as trials? Do you think a soldier has enough time during an attack, ambush or mission to stop get witness statements, bust out a camera and photograph the scene, write up chain of custody documents, read Miranda and book them? That's pretty much what's required in a civilian court. It'd be a farce to try that.
|
If they were detained without trial, and then you want to kill them without trial, that means that they never get a trial.
I can't say that I'm surprised to be hearing such stupid things from you, but for everyone else, I think that killing someone without even knowing whether they've done anything wrong is poor judgment.