Medal of Honor - 3rd since Vietnam

[MadelynIris]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7379706/

[Macfistowannabe]

Sgt. Smith is more than worthy of it. He was said to save over a hundred lives. An honorable life indeed.

[WinnieThePoo]

i wish , he was still alive

[financeguy]

Why venerate a war criminal?

Edited to add: As a man sows, thus shall he reap.

[A_Wanderer]

And why is the man a war criminal.

[financeguy]

As I said/implied, a man who spreads violence and war must not chicken out of the consequences of his illegal war-mongering, much as some would wish to venerate illegality and criminality. But not me.

When pigs fly, and when bullshit smells of roses, and when Ireland win more gold medals in the Olympics than Australia I'll venerate war mongerers.God gave you eyes to see, that's all I'd say.

[A_Wanderer]

This is the actions of one man in a combat situation that saved the lives of his comrades, how is he a war criminal.

[financeguy]

He shouldn't have been there in the first place.

[A_Wanderer]

That is evading the question is US Army Sgt. Paul Smith a war criminal?

[financeguy]

Without question, yes, he is. And I refuse to commemorate the death of a war criminal. What exactly requires clarification?


Incidentally, how many Iraqis do you need to murder before you get this medal?

[A_Wanderer]

Allright so you think that he is a war criminal because he killed Iraqi soldiers. Does this make every coalition soldier who has killed anybody a war criminal too?

[financeguy]

In this war, clearly, yes as the war itself is illegal. Therefore, the correct and moral decision for any US or British (or other) troops called up for "service" was to desert. Anyone who did not choose this option must bear the consequences of their direct participation in criminality.

There may be degrees of criminality - as for example (just raising an example off the top of my head) in the case of George W Bush who was only convicted on DUI once, whereas Cheney was convicted twice - so one has the worse criminal record than the other.

However that does not change the simple fact of criminality - some "Allied" troops were worst criminals than others - we now know that some shot civilians in cold blood, and tortured them for kicks for example - these are murderers, nothing more.

Others may have killed people in self defence - their crimes may have been less serious. However, all that fought on the "Allied" side were and are criminals, to a greater or lesser extent.

Therefore anyone fighting in it (on the "Allied" side) is a war criminal. Every event since the invasion has proven Chirac ( and Schroder) absolutely correct. They are the true leaders of Europe, unlike the GWB coward/lap dog Blair.

As I said previously, as a man sows thus shall he reap.

The wages of sin, is death.

Having said that the war criminals should be granted justice and a fair trial, which is more they gave for all the civilians they butchered.

[STING2]

Originally posted by financeguy
In this war, clearly, yes as the war itself is illegal. Therefore, the correct and moral decision for any US or British (or other) troops called up for "service" was to desert. Anyone who did not choose this option must bear the consequences of their direct participation in criminality.

There may be degrees of criminality - as for example (just raising an example off the top of my head) in the case of George W Bush who was only convicted on DUI once, whereas Cheney was convicted twice - so one has the worse criminal record than the other.

However that does not change the simple fact of criminality - some "Allied" troops were worst criminals than others - we now know that some shot civilians in cold blood, and tortured them for kicks for example - these are murderers, nothing more.

Others may have killed people in self defence - their crimes may have been less serious. However, all that fought on the "Allied" side were and are criminals, to a greater or lesser extent.

Therefore anyone fighting in it (on the "Allied" side) is a war criminal. Every event since the invasion has proven Chirac ( and Schroder) absolutely correct. They are the true leaders of Europe, unlike the GWB coward/lap dog Blair.

As I said previously, as a man sows thus shall he reap.

The wages of sin, is death.

Having said that the war criminals should be granted justice and a fair trial, which is more they gave for all the civilians they butchered.

The war was authorized by 3 different UN Security Council resolutions. Resolutions 678, 687, and more recently 1441 authorize the use of all means necessary to bring Iraq into compliance with 17 different UN resolutions all passed under chapter VII rules of the United Nations as well as the March 1991 Gulf War Ceacefire agreement.

Not only was this war legal from the political and diplomatic perspective, it was both necessary for the security of the region and the planet, and morally vital given the hell that Saddam had put the region and his people through and was continuing to do so.

All of the coalition troops, diplomatic personal, and other aid workers from all countries across the globe are hero's for what they have done in Iraq. They have removed a terrible menace to the planet and replaced it with a growing democracy. Only through the most disgusting and strange form of logic could one consider coalition personal as a whole to be criminals. Then again, there are people who accuse the Pope of being a criminal, so I guess such thoughts are possible.

My friends are NOT war criminals, nor are any of the other great men and women who have served over there. Their service is changing the world and making it a better place. The lives of Iraqi's are being improved on a daily basis and the Iraqi people now have the opportunity for a bright future, with a growing democracy, and the chance for great prosperity.

Every event since the invasion has proven Chirac and his side kick Schroder to be foolish. "Leaders" who could care less about what is in the best interest of the Persian Gulf Region or in fact their own countries vital interest as well.

Ten years and Twenty years down the road, when Iraq becomes a stable democracy, people will remember how France and Germany did little if anything to help the situation and instead tried to prevent the removal of SADDAM. Far better to question if Germany and France's actions were "criminal".

[financeguy]

Originally posted by STING2
My friends are NOT war criminals, nor are any of the other great men and women who have served over there. Their service is changing the world and making it a better place.

I'm genuinely sorry if you have friends who died or were injured in the conflict, but it doesn't change my fundamental view of the overall situation to be honest.

[financeguy]

Originally posted by STING2
Only through the most disgusting and strange form of logic could one consider coalition personal as a whole to be criminals. Then again, there are people who accuse the Pope of being a criminal, so I guess such thoughts are possible.

Disgusting and strange to you, perhaps. What I (and most of the world) would consider disgusting and strange is the disgusting and strange veneration of criminality that carries on here on a regular basis, as though because a man is dressed up in US army fatigues he must be venerated as some kind of hero.

And I'm not sure what the relevance of the Pope is to this thread.