Jamal Khashoggi

Article 38(1) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) lists four sources of international law: treaties and conventions, custom, general principles of law, and judicial decisions and teachings.

It does indeed, at least to all but the most two-dimensionally blind.
Speaking of two-dimensional and concrete, where has OC been?
You and hogg have done an admirable job of holding down Flatland.
Lol. Well you’ve convinced yourself at least. A hard task indeed
😂🤡
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
Now that we've established that we don't like Obama dropping a bomb on a citizen without court approval because he might be terrorist, can we get a show of hands on who approves the Saudis chopping a guy into little pieces because he wrote mean things about them in the newspaper?
You’ve actually already has several say it was wrong. Is there some magic number we need to get to in order to appease your feelings. Ball park how many we got to go?
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
I was giving you the international statute. You only asked for a statute. So you agree that I did indeed post a link that answered the question you actually asked.

This is a time I at least partially agree with you. An enemy combatant should be fair game regardless or race, creed, or national origin; and, therefore, always in season. However, remember your clowns under obama wanted to round up combatants and give them trials in US courts - kinda why Gitmo rather than a graveyard is full of sandbox critters. Oh, yeah, and the ones that were released went back to being enemy combatants.
 
Nah. I think he was trying to deflect from the rampant But Obamaing that was going on.
I don't care which President did it, I think it was wrong. There's a huge difference in killing someone while trying to detain them(because you're forced to) and just outright killing someone. I'm not for either party, unlike some. Luther constantly deflects any blame from the left, yet always finds evil on the right. I think both sides are corrupt. I was trying to see where you stand. It seems I got my answer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
I don't care which President did it, I think it was wrong. There's a huge difference in killing someone while trying to detain them(because you're forced to) and just outright killing someone. I'm not for either party, unlike some. Luther constantly deflects any blame from the left, yet always finds evil on the right. I think both sides are corrupt. I was trying to see where you stand. It seems I got my answer.[/QUOTE]

No you didn't.

Somehow I screwed up my reply, but you didn't get your answer. If you're actually curious I don't support either one, but I'm not surprised that the discussion turned into "let's talk about something Obama did instead of how one of our closest "allies" in the region chopped a guy into pieces cause he writes critical articles."
 
Last edited:
Somehow I screwed up my reply, but you didn't get your answer. If you're actually curious I don't support either one, but I'm not surprised that the discussion turned into "let's talk about something Obama did instead of how one of our closest "allies" in the region chopped a guy into pieces cause he writes critical articles."
Blame Luther and his usual distraction dumbassery.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
Somehow I screwed up my reply, but you didn't get your answer. If you're actually curious I don't support either one, but I'm not surprised that the discussion turned into "let's talk about something Obama did instead of how one of our closest "allies" in the region chopped a guy into pieces cause he writes critical articles."
What should be more concerning to us, a U.S. President that violates the Constitution, or an "ally" assassinating one of their own citizens on sovereign soil half a world away? I think we've all agreed the act itself was horrible, but why should our government intervene? I'm much more concerned with what our own elected officials do, regardless of the political party they pledge allegiance to. If I were a Saudi citizen, I'd express my outrage at the Saudi government(and apparently risk getting killed for it). But I'm not. I'm an American citizen. What our own government does is what most concerns me.
 
What should be more concerning to us, a U.S. President that violates the Constitution, or an "ally" assassinating one of their own citizens on sovereign soil half a world away? I think we've all agreed the act itself was horrible, but why should our government intervene? I'm much more concerned with what our own elected officials do, regardless of the political party they pledge allegiance to. If I were a Saudi citizen, I'd express my outrage at the Saudi government(and apparently risk getting killed for it). But I'm not. I'm an American citizen. What our own government does is what most concerns me.

I think there's plenty of outrage to go around. I think if we're in bed with the Saudis we ought to hold them to certain standards. You can But Obama all day if you want.
 
Now that we've established that we don't like Obama dropping a bomb on a citizen without court approval because he might be terrorist, can we get a show of hands on who approves the Saudis chopping a guy into little pieces because he wrote mean things about them in the newspaper?
I'd rather see a show of those that don't GAF.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
What should be more concerning to us, a U.S. President that violates the Constitution, or an "ally" assassinating one of their own citizens on sovereign soil half a world away? I think we've all agreed the act itself was horrible, but why should our government intervene? I'm much more concerned with what our own elected officials do, regardless of the political party they pledge allegiance to. If I were a Saudi citizen, I'd express my outrage at the Saudi government(and apparently risk getting killed for it). But I'm not. I'm an American citizen. What our own government does is what most concerns me.

You have to remember Islam has it's own way of looking at sins and correcting behavior - we tend to be far less blood thirsty than the religion of peace (or perhaps pieces). Maybe the best we can do is use this example for any idiots that would be OK with Sharia law here or other non Islamic states.
 
I think there's plenty of outrage to go around. I think if we're in bed with the Saudis we ought to hold them to certain standards. You can But Obama all day if you want.
So we should hold our "allies" to higher standards than we do ourselves? If anyone is deflecting here, it's you. I've commented on both situations and given my opinion outright. You keep dodging one while emphasizing the other. You've not even answered simple questions I've asked.
 
I think there's plenty of outrage to go around. I think if we're in bed with the Saudis we ought to hold them to certain standards. You can But Obama all day if you want.

They've got their ways and laws; we have ours. We tend not to stone people, or behead them, etc. - we can't even decide if corporal or capital punishment is acceptable.
 
So we should hold our "allies" to higher standards than we do ourselves? If anyone is deflecting here, it's you. I've commented on both situations and given my opinion outright. You keep dodging one while emphasizing the other. You've not even answered simple questions I've asked.

I already answered your question. How bout we hold our allies to the same standard we hold ourselves?

Edit: *we claim to hold ourselves.
 

VN Store



Back
Top