Colin Powell ( opinions )

static111

Meltdown99 said:

How is he a war criminal?  He was a general in the army, when you join the military you follow orders or face charges.  POTUS is the man who makes the ultimate call if military action is needed, am I correct?  Powell always seemed like a good one…and a respected 4 star general.  Also was he not one of the rare republicans who was disgusted by Trump.

Because he lied about WMDs to justify going into a never ending war?

brianlux

HughFreakingDillon said:

brianlux said:

Moonpig said:

War criminal

Competing with Trump for "Boldest Insult of a Recently Deceased Major American Figure"? 
Get in line. 
And while you're at it, maybe learn a little discretion in timing.  You only make yourself look bad here.

I get what you're saying Brian, but why do we have this habit of praising someone who is directly responsible for the deaths of thousands and thousands of people, just because they recently died? it's so odd to me. 

Yeah, I get what your saying.  I just don't like the "OK he's dead, now let's heap our hatred on him."   It just seems wrong to do that when someone has just died.  I suppose if we were talking about someone like Hitler, or some other major evil soul, that might be a different story.  But most often, trashing someone when they die?  To me that says as much about the person doing the trashing as it does the person being trashed.

HughFreakingDillon

brianlux said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

brianlux said:

Moonpig said:

War criminal

Competing with Trump for "Boldest Insult of a Recently Deceased Major American Figure"? 
Get in line. 
And while you're at it, maybe learn a little discretion in timing.  You only make yourself look bad here.

I get what you're saying Brian, but why do we have this habit of praising someone who is directly responsible for the deaths of thousands and thousands of people, just because they recently died? it's so odd to me. 

Yeah, I get what your saying.  I just don't like the "OK he's dead, now let's heap our hatred on him."   It just seems wrong to do that when someone has just died.  I suppose if we were talking about someone like Hitler, or some other major evil soul, that might be a different story.  But most often, trashing someone when they die?  To me that says as much about the person doing the trashing as it does the person being trashed.

I feel like most of those "trashing" are doing so as a reaction to the glorification of the person. 

brianlux

HughFreakingDillon said:

brianlux said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

brianlux said:

Moonpig said:

War criminal

Competing with Trump for "Boldest Insult of a Recently Deceased Major American Figure"? 
Get in line. 
And while you're at it, maybe learn a little discretion in timing.  You only make yourself look bad here.

I get what you're saying Brian, but why do we have this habit of praising someone who is directly responsible for the deaths of thousands and thousands of people, just because they recently died? it's so odd to me. 

Yeah, I get what your saying.  I just don't like the "OK he's dead, now let's heap our hatred on him."   It just seems wrong to do that when someone has just died.  I suppose if we were talking about someone like Hitler, or some other major evil soul, that might be a different story.  But most often, trashing someone when they die?  To me that says as much about the person doing the trashing as it does the person being trashed.

I feel like most of those "trashing" are doing so as a reaction to the glorification of the person. 

Well, I won't be glorifying him, nor will I trash him, not at this time.

Meltdown99

They say the 1st casualty of war is the truth.  He’s a general who is trained to follow orders…

HughFreakingDillon

he was SOS who knowingly mislead the UN about WMD to start a war, ending in the murder of thousands of innocents. 

that's not the same as "following orders in the military", which, by the way, you also aren't allowed to do if you know it's illegal. 

excusing the massacre of thousands while constantly vilifying another for wearing blackface is, well, a tad inconsistent, and just shows the bias at play. 

oftenreading

According to the United Nations, a war crime is a serious breach of international law committed against civilians or “enemy combatants” during an international or domestic armed conflict. A war crime occurs when superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering is inflicted upon an enemy.

A decent case can be made that he was a war criminal. Stating that fact is not the same thing as making an "insult". 

Halifax2TheMax

I lost all respect for the man when he sold his soul to Darth Cheney and the Evil Empire with his dog & pony show before the UN. He should have resigned and kept his reputation intact.

mickeyrat

HughFreakingDillon said:

he was SOS who knowingly mislead the UN about WMD to start a war, ending in the murder of thousands of innocents. 

that's not the same as "following orders in the military", which, by the way, you also aren't allowed to do if you know it's illegal. 

excusing the massacre of thousands while constantly vilifying another for wearing blackface is, well, a tad inconsistent, and just shows the bias at play. 

I'd argue whomever was in that position would have done the same thing. Bush's decision ultimately.....

Meltdown99

mickeyrat said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

he was SOS who knowingly mislead the UN about WMD to start a war, ending in the murder of thousands of innocents. 

that's not the same as "following orders in the military", which, by the way, you also aren't allowed to do if you know it's illegal. 

excusing the massacre of thousands while constantly vilifying another for wearing blackface is, well, a tad inconsistent, and just shows the bias at play. 

I'd argue whomever was in that position would have done the same thing. Bush's decision ultimately.....

Agreed.  The bucks stop with the presidents, and other than Trump most presidents stand and take responsibility…

I could care a less if the un feels they were lied to…the urn is useless.

I think it’s a forgone conclusion that the POTUS will get blood on his hands…part of the job.  I don’t necessarily like it…but it is what it is and I’d still rather have the US as a friend…even though it may not seem it times.

HughFreakingDillon

mickeyrat said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

he was SOS who knowingly mislead the UN about WMD to start a war, ending in the murder of thousands of innocents. 

that's not the same as "following orders in the military", which, by the way, you also aren't allowed to do if you know it's illegal. 

excusing the massacre of thousands while constantly vilifying another for wearing blackface is, well, a tad inconsistent, and just shows the bias at play. 

I'd argue whomever was in that position would have done the same thing. Bush's decision ultimately.....

what I read was (and of course this could be untrue) that he initially pushed back against war in iraq. But then was pressured and he caved. that, to me, shows a lack of character. I agree with halifax, if he truly didn't agree with it, he should have resigned. 

brianlux

oftenreading said:

According to the United Nations, a war crime is a serious breach of international law committed against civilians or “enemy combatants” during an international or domestic armed conflict. A war crime occurs when superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering is inflicted upon an enemy.

A decent case can be made that he was a war criminal. Stating that fact is not the same thing as making an "insult". 

Fact?  I guess I don't understand the meaning of "fact".

Or maybe there's no "innocent until proven guilty" where you come from?

oftenreading

brianlux said:

oftenreading said:

According to the United Nations, a war crime is a serious breach of international law committed against civilians or “enemy combatants” during an international or domestic armed conflict. A war crime occurs when superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering is inflicted upon an enemy.

A decent case can be made that he was a war criminal. Stating that fact is not the same thing as making an "insult". 

Fact?  I guess I don't understand the meaning of "fact".

Or maybe there's no "innocent until proven guilty" where you come from?

The “fact” is that a decent case can be made, like I said. And there is plenty of information available on the issue for people to make up their minds. 

brianlux

oftenreading said:

brianlux said:

oftenreading said:

According to the United Nations, a war crime is a serious breach of international law committed against civilians or “enemy combatants” during an international or domestic armed conflict. A war crime occurs when superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering is inflicted upon an enemy.

A decent case can be made that he was a war criminal. Stating that fact is not the same thing as making an "insult". 

Fact?  I guess I don't understand the meaning of "fact".

Or maybe there's no "innocent until proven guilty" where you come from?

The “fact” is that a decent case can be made, like I said. And there is plenty of information available on the issue for people to make up their minds. 

OK, at least I know what you mean by "fact".