Posted on 08/19/2011 5:36:35 PM PDT by Pan_Yan
Actually, the correct title is "Law of Armed Conflict", which every member of the US military is briefed on every year. And yes, whether you agree or not, this is an armed conflict.
Actually, the process of impeachment takes plave solely in the House. The House votes to impeach or refuses to impeach. (think of impeachment as something like a grand jury indictment but more significant)
If the House impeaches a president the case goes to the senate where they consider the charges and vote to convict or not convict.
In either case, once impeached, a president remains impeached forever.
Clinton was impeached by the House but the senate failed to convict. Nevertheless, he is an impeached president and will remain so throughout history.
When did that start? I got out in 1997 and didn't get that lecture once. Of course submarines don't take many prisoners ...
You don’t need a declaration of war to have a war under international law. A state of war exists when hostilities start. Hostilities started when Libya started its civil war.
Most American wars have been undeclared... they tend to be the smaller ones.
Most wars around the world are undeclared. There’s nothing illegal about them under the laws of war. Don’t be that guy.
“People have been begging for Libya to refine its oil from here to export,” said Abdul Karim Harqash, who has worked in Zawiyah as an engineer for 34 years. “We will take it step by step but today is the start of a great future of jobs and growth here.”
Just for the record most of my posts have been tongue in cheeck, I’m just too lazy to add a sarcasm tag. And yes, I can name all six countries (that we know of) where our military is engaged in combat.
P.S. the whole idea of a ‘legal’ or ‘illegal’ war is stupid to begin with. It’s along the same lines as the media complaining that Israel retaliates against attacks too strongly and they’re not being ‘fair’.
Looks like the RAF has hit a new low, At one time it was attacking ships like Bismarck and Tirpitz, now it brags about bombing beaten troops fleeing a lost battle in a rowboat. So sad. Obama’s War, he corrupts everyone he comes in contact with.
April 4th, 1984. Last night to the flicks. All war films. One very good one of a ship full of refugees being bombed somewhere in the Mediterranean. Audience much amused by shots of a great huge fat man trying to swim away with a helicopter after him, first you saw him wallowing along in the water like a porpoise, then you saw him through the helicopters gunsights, then he was full of holes and the sea round him turned pink and he sank as suddenly as though the holes had let in the water, audience shouting with laughter when he sank. then you saw a lifeboat full of children with a helicopter hovering over it. there was a middle-aged woman might have been a jewess sitting up in the bow with a little boy about three years old in her arms. little boy screaming with fright and hiding his head between her breasts as if he was trying to burrow right into her and the woman putting her arms round him and comforting him although she was blue with fright herself, all the time covering him up as much as possible as if she thought her arms could keep the bullets off him. then the helicopter planted a 20 kilo bomb in among them terrific flash and the boat went all to matchwood. then there was a wonderful shot of a child’s arm going up up up right up into the air a helicopter with a camera in its nose must have followed it up and there was a lot of applause from the party seats but a woman down in the prole part of the house suddenly started kicking up a fuss and shouting they didnt oughter of showed it not in front of kids they didnt it aint right not in front of kids it aint until the police turned her turned her out i dont suppose anything happened to her nobody cares what the proles say typical prole reaction they never —
WAR IS PEACE
My first briefing was in boot camp in '79, and once a year until I retired in '07 (USAF, Ret). Strange though, first thought was maybe the Navy didn't want to waste the time/money to put together a thorough briefing because your mission is mostly on or under the water, but I knew many Navy personnel performing EOD and customs duties when I was in Iraq.
Never got those briefings. And we didn’t march very well either. And weren’t all that good at saluting. Or uniforms. Or a bunch of other stuff.
But we worked like dogs 100+ hours a week and always got our annual sexual harassment training. So I guess it all evens out.
This and that, back and forth, either this or that.
Whatever...
It was still a chickencrap thing for the British to do.
Personally,I don’t believe we have made the situation better in Afghanistan,Iraq,Egypt, or Libya.But we darn near bankrupted ourselves doing whatever it is we’re doing.
All these highly edumacated “presidents” of the past decades have been disasters.The Democrats do have the lead in how bad they muck things up. LBJ set in motion the Great Society that ruined our society and Carter set in motion the destabilizing of the the Mideast and promotion of thugocrats everywhere.
It's not the Republicans in the Senate you need to worry about.
We've already learned that no Democrat Senator will vote to impeach a Democrat President -- even if the charges rise to the level (of high crimes and misdemeanors) and are proven.
To remove, you'll need 67 votes. You get 47 Republican votes, but you'll never get 20 Democrat votes. Indeed, you won't get even one.
Impeachment is pointless.
“Although a challenging target, small and under way at sea, a direct hit was scored with a laser-guided Paveway bomb which sank the vessel,” Major Gen Nick Pope said.
The RAF delivered the final blow just as two senior officers boarded the ship from an inflatable...
The tug was 'underway' as two senior officers boarded from an inflatable? A 'challenging target'? Ah, but they were going to 'regroup' you see...
Something cold and slimey crawled over my skin, reading that.
“we darn near bankrupted ourselves”
Sorry about the long post, but excerpting doesn’t help Orwell respond to that point:
“The essential act of war is destruction, not necessarily of human lives, but of the products of human labour. War is a way of shattering to pieces, or pouring into the stratosphere, or sinking in the depths of the sea, materials which might otherwise be used to make the masses too comfortable, and hence, in the long run, too intelligent. Even when weapons of war are not actually destroyed, their manufacture is still a convenient way of expending labour power without producing anything that can be consumed. A Floating Fortress, for example, has locked up in it the labour that would build several hundred cargo-ships. Ultimately it is scrapped as obsolete, never having brought any material benefit to anybody, and with further enormous labours another Floating Fortress is built. In principle the war effort is always so planned as to eat up any surplus that might exist after meeting the bare needs of the population. In practice the needs of the population are always underestimated, with the result that there is a chronic shortage of half the necessities of life; but this is looked on as an advantage. It is deliberate policy to keep even the favoured groups somewhere near the brink of hardship, because a general state of scarcity increases the importance of small privileges and thus magnifies the distinction between one group and another. By the standards of the early twentieth century, even a member of the Inner Party lives an austere, laborious kind of life. Nevertheless, the few luxuries that he does enjoy his large, well-appointed flat, the better texture of his clothes, the better quality of his food and drink and tobacco, his two or three servants, his private motor-car or helicopter — set him in a different world from a member of the Outer Party, and the members of the Outer Party have a similar advantage in comparison with the submerged masses whom we call ‘the proles’. The social atmosphere is that of a besieged city, where the possession of a lump of horseflesh makes the difference between wealth and poverty. And at the same time the consciousness of being at war, and therefore in danger, makes the handing-over of all power to a small caste seem the natural, unavoidable condition of survival.”
So. it’s pointless for the grand jury to indict because they anticipate that there will be jury nullification, no matter what evidence is presented?
If you'll recall, we've been down this road before -- in 1998-99.
The exercise was unproductive. A waste of time.
Understand as well, that an impeachment is a political event -- not a legal one.
But you intimated that the Republicans in the Senate would be the prolem. And they wouldn't. It would be the Democrats.
Indeed, even if the House impeached Obama, I'd bet money that Harry Reid would find a way not to try the case in the Senate.
Since when do boats fly?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.