Well, I fully understand your arguments, but would hope for some more exact and factual descriptions
-the Taleban, without any sovereignty of their own
Was good enough to negotiate about oil pipes only some months earlier
-The process of sorting through the prisoners and determing their exact roles in that crime is slow...The US, or any nation, has the absolute right and obligation to protect it's citizens against these kinds of attacks.
Yes, every sovereign nation decides on how to handle dilemmas, as well as taking the international
responsibilities of the process of that in the future
Well, after that your arguments are already fairly well removed from global and international consensus,
maybe reaching its peak in
- ..the rights of the men who committed this crime...
especially as you do not specify "this crime", those words kind of just suddenly popped up, seemingly
specifying "the controversial nature of the US decision" although something like " those that condoned
or abetted them".
That is, those often used words of "intellectual honesty" seem to still be lacking.
Ilmarinen
Btw, many cultures have definitions like "the right of ones own hands" and has worked on that reality
for many, many generations.
- In time, eventually, there will be a judicial process.
Yes, USA has survived many of those legal and cultural dilemmas, seems another century and
legal, even 1700s-constitutional, chapter has started in pretty much the same way as earlier ones.
Cannot but be reminded of the Ginsburg comment that "not one nation have copied the US legal
system", answer to a young student asking "why don't they-them all copy the USA legal, jucidial system"
Seems like a good answer for both the media- and democracy-system, although it is more difficult
to find some few persons ultimately responsible for those issues and dilemmas. |
