Author Topic: The Khadr Thread  (Read 466409 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Loachman

  • Former Army Pilot in Drag
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 186,097
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,746
Re: The Khadr Thread
« Reply #2200 on: July 16, 2017, 21:46:11 »
http://thestarphoenix.com/opinion/columnists/gormley-khadr-pay-off-betrayed-our-values

Khadr pay off betrayed our values

John Gormley, Saskatoon StarPhoenix Updated: July 14, 2017 6:00 AM CST

Like a mythical serpent eating itself, it was a sight to behold as Saskatchewan Liberal MP and Minister of Public Safety Ralph Goodale swallowed himself on national television trying to defend the indefensible as the government paid Omar Khadr $10.5 million and apologized to him.

As a teen fighting in Afghanistan on the side of the Taleban, just weeks before his 16th birthday, Khadr pleaded guilty to the “murder in violation of the laws of war” of U.S. Delta Force medic Sgt. Chris Speer who was killed by a hand grenade tossed after a firefight in 2002.

Khadr was held for 10 years in the U.S. military detention facility in Guantanamo Bay and was released to Canada where he spent three more years in jail before being freed on bail in 2015.

Saying that the Liberal government had “no choice” but to pay Khadr, Mr. Goodale gazed at the cameras, tucked in his chin, lowered his voice half an octave and opined with great gravitas.

But the redoubtable politician act fell flat. Within seconds, Goodale was desperately trying to justify the Khadr payout because the “Harper government” had not “repatriated Mr. Khadr or otherwise resolved the matter.”

In 2010, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) clearly ruled that the federal government did not have to repatriate Khadr.

The Court, however, did rule that Khadr’s international human rights and his Charter right to “life, liberty and security of the person” had been violated back in 2003 when Canadian officials sent to Guantanamo Bay interviewed Khadr and then turned over the transcripts to his American captors.

The SCC has never ordered damages to be paid to Khadr.

Oddly, Goodale mentioned none of this. Nor did he explain his own personal role as a senior Liberal cabinet minister from 2002-06 when he was presumably briefed on Khadr sitting in Guantanamo Bay.

It was only later, safely back home, that Khadr sued Canada, demanding $20 million for his rights violations.

To understand the frustration and anger of right-thinking and fair-minded Canadians - 71 per cent of whom oppose Goodale and Trudeau’s unconscionable decision - two things must be realized.

First, real people never bought the spin surrounding Khadr, so skilfully crafted by his legal team and elites in the media and politics.

While many people acknowledge some factual ambiguity in the case, they will not accept the unquestioning dogma that Khadr was a completely blameless victim, an innocent manipulated and brainwashed by evil parents, pressed into action as a “child soldier” and incapable of renouncing violence.

They won’t buy that he could not control his own actions (including smirking on videos) as he proudly built and buried roadside bombs designed to kill and maim young Canadian and allied soldiers.

And, while the guileless little Omar seemed to know specific details of the killing when he admitted to it under oath, it turns out he was lying all along - heroically, of course, to thwart the evil Americans - to escape sleep deprivation and solitary confinement.

His current “I can’t remember, maybe I dreamed it all” version lacks an air of reality.

Second, Canadians understand that if you claim to be entitled to something, then you’d best prove it.

Had Trudeau and Goodale not ended this case by paying Khadr millions, the final determination of his demand for damages could have ended up in the hands of the Supreme Court, as it arguably should have.

So far, no court has established a test for compensating someone whose rights have been violated after they were actively fighting against Canada on foreign soil, betraying their own citizenship and admitting to deliberately killing an allied soldier.

While litigation costs and the final payment might (or might not) have been more expensive had the case gone to trial, the principle of paying a terrorist is too important not to have final judicial certainty.

Having a trial also would have seen the long overdue testing of Khadr under cross-examination.

Beyond lawyers and publicists speaking for him and several softball interviews from friendly media, no one has ever heard Khadr explain himself in his own words.

Far from “no choice,” the Trudeau Liberals had plenty of choices.

They just made the wrong one that embarrassed Canadians and betrayed our values.

John Gormley is a broadcaster, lawyer, author and former Progressive Conservative MP whose radio talk show is heard weekdays from 8:30 a.m. to 12:30

Offline jmt18325

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 21,450
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,181
Re: The Khadr Thread
« Reply #2201 on: July 16, 2017, 21:54:41 »
The Khadr payout is actually, ironically, aimed at upholding our values.

Offline gryphonv

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 7,865
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 291
Re: The Khadr Thread
« Reply #2202 on: July 16, 2017, 22:06:26 »
http://thestarphoenix.com/opinion/columnists/gormley-khadr-pay-off-betrayed-our-values

Khadr pay off betrayed our values

John Gormley, Saskatoon StarPhoenix Updated: July 14, 2017 6:00 AM CST

Like a mythical serpent eating itself, it was a sight to behold as Saskatchewan Liberal MP and Minister of Public Safety Ralph Goodale swallowed himself on national television trying to defend the indefensible as the government paid Omar Khadr $10.5 million and apologized to him.

As a teen fighting in Afghanistan on the side of the Taleban, just weeks before his 16th birthday, Khadr pleaded guilty to the “murder in violation of the laws of war” of U.S. Delta Force medic Sgt. Chris Speer who was killed by a hand grenade tossed after a firefight in 2002.

Khadr was held for 10 years in the U.S. military detention facility in Guantanamo Bay and was released to Canada where he spent three more years in jail before being freed on bail in 2015.

Saying that the Liberal government had “no choice” but to pay Khadr, Mr. Goodale gazed at the cameras, tucked in his chin, lowered his voice half an octave and opined with great gravitas.

But the redoubtable politician act fell flat. Within seconds, Goodale was desperately trying to justify the Khadr payout because the “Harper government” had not “repatriated Mr. Khadr or otherwise resolved the matter.”

In 2010, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) clearly ruled that the federal government did not have to repatriate Khadr.

The Court, however, did rule that Khadr’s international human rights and his Charter right to “life, liberty and security of the person” had been violated back in 2003 when Canadian officials sent to Guantanamo Bay interviewed Khadr and then turned over the transcripts to his American captors.

The SCC has never ordered damages to be paid to Khadr.

Oddly, Goodale mentioned none of this. Nor did he explain his own personal role as a senior Liberal cabinet minister from 2002-06 when he was presumably briefed on Khadr sitting in Guantanamo Bay.

It was only later, safely back home, that Khadr sued Canada, demanding $20 million for his rights violations.

To understand the frustration and anger of right-thinking and fair-minded Canadians - 71 per cent of whom oppose Goodale and Trudeau’s unconscionable decision - two things must be realized.

First, real people never bought the spin surrounding Khadr, so skilfully crafted by his legal team and elites in the media and politics.

While many people acknowledge some factual ambiguity in the case, they will not accept the unquestioning dogma that Khadr was a completely blameless victim, an innocent manipulated and brainwashed by evil parents, pressed into action as a “child soldier” and incapable of renouncing violence.

They won’t buy that he could not control his own actions (including smirking on videos) as he proudly built and buried roadside bombs designed to kill and maim young Canadian and allied soldiers.

And, while the guileless little Omar seemed to know specific details of the killing when he admitted to it under oath, it turns out he was lying all along - heroically, of course, to thwart the evil Americans - to escape sleep deprivation and solitary confinement.

His current “I can’t remember, maybe I dreamed it all” version lacks an air of reality.

Second, Canadians understand that if you claim to be entitled to something, then you’d best prove it.

Had Trudeau and Goodale not ended this case by paying Khadr millions, the final determination of his demand for damages could have ended up in the hands of the Supreme Court, as it arguably should have.

So far, no court has established a test for compensating someone whose rights have been violated after they were actively fighting against Canada on foreign soil, betraying their own citizenship and admitting to deliberately killing an allied soldier.

While litigation costs and the final payment might (or might not) have been more expensive had the case gone to trial, the principle of paying a terrorist is too important not to have final judicial certainty.

Having a trial also would have seen the long overdue testing of Khadr under cross-examination.

Beyond lawyers and publicists speaking for him and several softball interviews from friendly media, no one has ever heard Khadr explain himself in his own words.

Far from “no choice,” the Trudeau Liberals had plenty of choices.

They just made the wrong one that embarrassed Canadians and betrayed our values.

John Gormley is a broadcaster, lawyer, author and former Progressive Conservative MP whose radio talk show is heard weekdays from 8:30 a.m. to 12:30

This is a home run in my book. Exactly the sentiments I am feeling.

Offline Loachman

  • Former Army Pilot in Drag
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 186,097
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,746
Re: The Khadr Thread
« Reply #2203 on: July 16, 2017, 23:10:03 »
The Khadr payout is actually, ironically, aimed at upholding our values.

Your definition of "our" does not match mine.

My values do not include turning enemies into multi-millionaires.

Online mariomike

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 428,610
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,370
    • The job.
Re: The Khadr Thread
« Reply #2204 on: July 16, 2017, 23:39:19 »
This will be my final post in this thread, it's a blog article written by Craig Forcese B.A., M.A., L.L.B., L.L.M. Who is a professor of law at the University of Ottawa.

If you want to actually understand the legal issues surrounding this case, read it.  Continue to be mad about it if you wish but understand this is WAY BIGGER than petty partisan politics.

Link to original:  http://craigforcese.squarespace.com/national-security-law-blog/2017/7/11/a-once-final-parsing-of-the-legal-context-for-the-khadr-sett.html

 :goodpost:

« Last Edit: July 17, 2017, 08:26:54 by mariomike »
Get on the bus. Take a ride with us.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2lSGnPl-ww

Offline jmt18325

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 21,450
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,181
Re: The Khadr Thread
« Reply #2205 on: July 17, 2017, 00:30:59 »
Your definition of "our" does not match mine.

My values do not include turning enemies into multi-millionaires.

Do your values include our constitutionally guaranteed protections?  Mine do.

Offline E. B. Korcz Forrester

    ~ live and let live!

  • New Member
  • **
  • -165
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 44
Re: The Khadr Thread
« Reply #2206 on: July 17, 2017, 03:56:24 »
The discussion is becoming repetitive. Let's just agree to disagree.

I pain to point out that while the CAF training regime does include domestic and international law, applying laws objectively to a set of fact is a skill that develops independently of CAF training. Many, regrettably, appear to run into problems with the "objectively" part. Subjectivity abounds.
« Last Edit: July 17, 2017, 04:00:35 by E. B. Korcz Forrester »

Offline jollyjacktar

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 132,402
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,520
  • My uncle F/Sgt W.H.S. Buckwell KIA 14/05/43 22YOA
Re: The Khadr Thread
« Reply #2207 on: July 17, 2017, 06:57:54 »
Your definition of "our" does not match mine.

My values do not include turning enemies into multi-millionaires.

Or mine.   :goodpost:
I'm just like the CAF, I seem to have retention issues.

Offline Loachman

  • Former Army Pilot in Drag
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 186,097
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,746
Re: The Khadr Thread
« Reply #2208 on: July 17, 2017, 07:42:04 »
Do your values include our constitutionally guaranteed protections?  Mine do.

Please point us to the section that says he should have been handed $10.5M tax-free.

This should have been fought to the bitter end, just as the Liberals are fighting the veterans' class-action suit to the bitter end.

Liberals are quite selective when it comes to who does and does not receive constitutional protection. Read the Firearms Act of 1995.

Offline gryphonv

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 7,865
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 291
Re: The Khadr Thread
« Reply #2209 on: July 17, 2017, 08:22:54 »
Please point us to the section that says he should have been handed $10.5M tax-free.

This should have been fought to the bitter end, just as the Liberals are fighting the veterans' class-action suit to the bitter end.

Liberals are quite selective when it comes to who does and does not receive constitutional protection. Read the Firearms Act of 1995.

Loachman  settle down I can only upvote you so much in one day.

Offline Old Sweat

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 201,280
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,367
Re: The Khadr Thread
« Reply #2210 on: July 17, 2017, 08:57:02 »
In an effort to lighten the discourse a bit, I am passing on a suggestion made by a public servant on CFRA in Ottawa this morning. The suggestion was to disburse Khadr's award in monthly payments using the Phoenix pay system.

Online PuckChaser

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 879,295
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,232
    • Peacekeeper's Homepage
Re: The Khadr Thread
« Reply #2211 on: July 17, 2017, 09:05:17 »
Do your values include our constitutionally guaranteed protections?  Mine do.

Maybe we should have tested the amount of a breach of charter rights on a convicted terrorist in the Federal/SCC instead of just cutting a cheque? If I was Mahar Arar, I'd be pretty pissed right about now. Khadr's case is nothing like what happened to Arar, but they got the same payout.

Offline gryphonv

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 7,865
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 291
Re: The Khadr Thread
« Reply #2212 on: July 17, 2017, 09:12:34 »
Maybe we should have tested the amount of a breach of charter rights on a convicted terrorist in the Federal/SCC instead of just cutting a cheque? If I was Mahar Arar, I'd be pretty pissed right about now. Khadr's case is nothing like what happened to Arar, but they got the same payout.

I concur. Not once did I feel angry about Arars settlement.  The only sad thing is they used it as precedence for this one. One man with clear links to terrorism and another who by all accounts is a peaceful law abiding man.

Offline Simian Turner

    is a humbled, curious veteran!

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 40,135
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,375
  • Do the right thing; do the thing right!
Re: The Khadr Thread
« Reply #2213 on: July 17, 2017, 09:53:35 »
This Trudeau pay-off to Khadr reminds me of the payouts that the US military and others handed out while I was in Afghanistan on tour.  Commanders and their staff literally walked around handing out money to Afghans whose lives, personal effects and homes had been 'damaged' by coalition force actions.  Canada did not adhere to this cash settlement philosophy.  I totally agree that we should use the justice system to determine 'damages'.

Some folks see that the only route to becoming 'whole again' is through a delivery truck loaded with bags of loonies?  I don't see the Pope running around handing out money to children 'damaged' by deranged priests.  It will be a sad day when 'hush little baby money' is preferred to 'justice'. 
The grand essentials of happiness: something to do, something to love, something to hope for.  Allan K. Chalmers

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 103,170
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,904
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: The Khadr Thread
« Reply #2214 on: July 17, 2017, 10:14:22 »
Do your values include our constitutionally guaranteed protections?  Mine do.

Lots of gun owners in this country wished they had Charter Protections

Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 167,260
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,822
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: The Khadr Thread
« Reply #2215 on: July 17, 2017, 10:21:11 »
The Khadr payout is actually, ironically, aimed at upholding our values.

HALF of our values. 

The other, "un-upheld" value of being a good person who deserves the rights and freedoms?  You know, being "Canadian."  Not so much. 

Many argue that the legal process should be respected.  I agree FULLY! :nod: 

Don't limit the legal process to determining if his rights and freedoms were infringed upon...use it also to determine whether Khadr contravened the Criminal Code of Canada, particularly Sections 83 and 431 (which, as noted here, everyone knows to have been in place in 2001, well before Khadr appears to have committed terrorist acts such as making IEDs in AFG).  Then, no one can complain that he was prosecuted unfairly in another system using an Act that post-dated Khadr's actions.

:2c:

Regards
G2G

Online milnews.ca

  • Info Curator, Baker & Food Slut
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Relic
  • *
  • 406,465
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 21,467
    • MILNEWS.ca-Military News for Canadians
Re: The Khadr Thread
« Reply #2216 on: July 17, 2017, 10:40:50 »
... The other, "un-upheld" value of being a good person a Canadian who deserves the rights and freedoms?...
I'm unhappy about the settlement, but the value being upheld is that of all Canadians getting fair access to the rights & freedoms bin, not just those we like/agree with.  Otherwise, there'd be no need for courts or defence counsel for any criminal - just lock 'em up & throw away the key.  That said, though ...
... Don't limit the legal process to determining if his rights and freedoms were infringed upon...use it also to determine whether Khadr contravened the Criminal Code of Canada, particularly Sections 83 and 431 (which, as noted here, everyone knows to have been in place in 2001, well before Khadr appears to have committed terrorist acts such as making IEDs in AFG).  Then, no one can complain that he was prosecuted unfairly in another system using an Act that post-dated Khadr's actions.
That.  Right.  There.  And if previous governments of both colours chose to use the legal process this way, the results may have been quite different.
“The risk of insult is the price of clarity.” -- Roy H. Williams

The words I share here are my own, not those of anyone else or anybody I may be affiliated with.

Tony Prudori
MILNEWS.ca - Twitter

Offline Humphrey Bogart

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 87,884
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,489
Re: The Khadr Thread
« Reply #2217 on: July 17, 2017, 10:47:12 »
HALF of our values. 

The other, "un-upheld" value of being a good person who deserves the rights and freedoms?  You know, being "Canadian."  Not so much. 

Many argue that the legal process should be respected.  I agree FULLY! :nod: 

Don't limit the legal process to determining if his rights and freedoms were infringed upon...use it also to determine whether Khadr contravened the Criminal Code of Canada, particularly Sections 83 and 431 (which, as noted here, everyone knows to have been in place in 2001, well before Khadr appears to have committed terrorist acts such as making IEDs in AFG).  Then, no one can complain that he was prosecuted unfairly in another system using an Act that post-dated Khadr's actions.

:2c:

Regards
G2G

I know I said I wouldn't post here again, I lied, sorry  8)

I think you bring up a great point though G2G.

I feel like successive governments, in an effort to keep their hands out of the immediate fire line, made short term decisions that made political sense at the time. 

Long term though, they are politically damaging.  The Khadr case exists in the same legal vacuum as the Afghan detainee issue. 

We actually had two different forces operating in Afghanistan:

ISAF (which was a UN mandated mission, operating in Afghanistan on request of the Afghan government, which was installed by the United States) 8) and;

Operation Enduring Freedom (which operated independently of our ISAF mission and waa focused on anti-terrorism and was fought primarily by our Clandestine forces). 

The government escaped by the skin's of their teeth WRT detainees because the Canadian public doesn't give a toss about Afghans.  They weren't so lucky this time.

All this to say, as we were never officially at war in Afghanistan, I think the real lesson in all of this is don't go to war or use military force if you aren't prepared to go all the way or clean up the mess you made afterwards.

The French learned this the hard way in Algeria, I think we are now also having our own little moment of 'Beau Geste'

 :2c:

« Last Edit: July 17, 2017, 11:02:14 by Humphrey Bogart »

Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 167,260
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,822
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: The Khadr Thread
« Reply #2218 on: July 17, 2017, 11:52:19 »
All this to say, as we were never officially at war in Afghanistan, I think the real lesson in all of this is don't go to war or use military force if you aren't prepared to go all the way or clean up the mess you made afterwards.

HB, this too must be part of the Canadian dialogue when issues such as Khadr and other Canadians acting in places far away, but still 'connected' via contemporary issues, are in play. :nod:

There are many questions that can come of this.  What happens if Canadians that appear to be legitimately looking to augment foreign forces against terrorism (eg. fighting with YPG, etc... in IRQ to fight ISIS) are involved with a group that could swing its focus and be considered less than aligned with Canadian values?  Would they get the same positive reception upon their return to Canada?

Just to be clear, my point above is to reinforce yours, HB, that Canadians need to be ready to discuss the issues, not that Canadian's fighting against ISIS currently are anywhere close to Khadr and others.  I still can't help wondering to myself if any of the IEDs that it appears Khadr was helping to make, were involved in any incidents where Canadian soldiers were killed or injured.

Food for thought, all around, for sure.

Regards
G2G

Offline RCPalmer

  • Member
  • ****
  • 9,475
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 140
Re: The Khadr Thread
« Reply #2219 on: July 17, 2017, 12:16:40 »
This Trudeau pay-off to Khadr reminds me of the payouts that the US military and others handed out while I was in Afghanistan on tour.  Commanders and their staff literally walked around handing out money to Afghans whose lives, personal effects and homes had been 'damaged' by coalition force actions.  Canada did not adhere to this cash settlement philosophy.  I totally agree that we should use the justice system to determine 'damages'.

Some folks see that the only route to becoming 'whole again' is through a delivery truck loaded with bags of loonies?  I don't see the Pope running around handing out money to children 'damaged' by deranged priests.  It will be a sad day when 'hush little baby money' is preferred to 'justice'.

Canada was compensating Afghan nationals for a variety of damages resulting from Canadian Forces activity such as vehicle accidents, damaged crops, etc.  This was a big part of the BG LEGAD's job on my deployments.  A number of "Ex Gratia" payments were also made to the families of Afghan civilians killed as a result of Canadian Forces actions.   

Without completely derailing the thread, what would the alternative be?  There were definitely some downsides to the approach.  People were intentionally causing vehicle accidents to get a payout. Compensating a landowner for a poppy field destroyed in a CAF operation might be indirectly funding the Taliban.  However, I couldn't see us leaving those people high and dry for a number of ethical, and tactical reasons.

 

Offline Loachman

  • Former Army Pilot in Drag
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 186,097
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,746
Re: The Khadr Thread
« Reply #2220 on: July 17, 2017, 12:52:32 »
Not unlike Manoeuvre Damage paid to Germans by 4 Brigade.

Although more chickens were killed than civilians.

Aside from a bunch of tank ruts in cornfields, I know of one woman's car being crushed by a Leopard (she survived), a few buildings in villages with narrow streets and tight corners clipped by various armoured vehicles, and a couple of Combat Jacuzzis created when engineers dug in the wrong spot and hit watermains.

Offline Humphrey Bogart

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 87,884
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,489
Re: The Khadr Thread
« Reply #2221 on: July 17, 2017, 13:21:04 »
HB, this too must be part of the Canadian dialogue when issues such as Khadr and other Canadians acting in places far away, but still 'connected' via contemporary issues, are in play. :nod:

There are many questions that can come of this.  What happens if Canadians that appear to be legitimately looking to augment foreign forces against terrorism (eg. fighting with YPG, etc... in IRQ to fight ISIS) are involved with a group that could swing its focus and be considered less than aligned with Canadian values?  Would they get the same positive reception upon their return to Canada?

Just to be clear, my point above is to reinforce yours, HB, that Canadians need to be ready to discuss the issues, not that Canadian's fighting against ISIS currently are anywhere close to Khadr and others.  I still can't help wondering to myself if any of the IEDs that it appears Khadr was helping to make, were involved in any incidents where Canadian soldiers were killed or injured.

Food for thought, all around, for sure.

Regards
G2G

G2G, your insight in this thread is a welcome addition.

How much do you want to bet the next political hot potato that rears its ugly head is the Kurdish question?

We've aligned ourselves with a group that is actively going against our political position of a unified Iraqi state. 

People need to stop focusing on the minutiae and start looking at the real issues.
« Last Edit: July 17, 2017, 13:25:48 by Humphrey Bogart »

Offline suffolkowner

  • Member
  • ****
  • 9,130
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 240
Re: The Khadr Thread
« Reply #2222 on: July 17, 2017, 13:24:55 »
Hasn't it been illegal to fight in foreign wars since the Spanish civil war? i thought that Harper had re strengthened it as well?

Offline gryphonv

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 7,865
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 291
Re: The Khadr Thread
« Reply #2223 on: July 17, 2017, 13:33:48 »
G2G, your insight in this thread is a welcome addition.

How much do you want to bet the next political hot potato that rears its ugly head is the Kurdish question.

We've aligned ourselves with a group that is actively going against our political position of a unified Iraqi state. 

People need to stop focusing on the minutiae and start looking at the real issues.

There will be no win with that. I never realized how bad the attitude towards Kurdish was until I had a dorm mate in university from Turkey. It was unbridled anger and vitriol when we asked him about Kurdish people. And for all other aspects he seemed pretty level headed.

They are pretty much universally hated by all the nations around them, I doubt there is a peaceful way forward with any of the nations around there that ends with the Kurdish having their own state.

Offline shawn5o

  • New Member
  • **
  • 180
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 27
  • "We have met the enemy and he is us!" Pogo
Re: The Khadr Thread
« Reply #2224 on: July 17, 2017, 14:59:28 »
Your 2 cents are worth about that much.  The Supreme Court has already ruled.

By a 5-4 ruling. And the SCC does make mistakes
Freedom from government, annoying do-gooders, overbearing know-it-alls, and jerks are all that I want in life.