So Zelensky's left hand man, who was implicated in this corruption, fled the country, and now his right hand man has been forced to resign.
Maybe it's $50 to $100 billion stolen from the Ukrainian money, which is no surprise given Biden's standard kickback of 10% and the hundreds of billions we, and Europe sent there.
How clean must Trump be if he can have decades of his business and tax records combed through by his political enemies, and the best they can come up with is made up crimes, but it looks like the money went, not just through Europe, via Estonia, but several US Congressmen are implicated. The reason they hate Trump is because he doesn't dip his beak, like they do, it makes them worried. There is an old mafia saying, "The only way to deal with an honest cop is to put him down."
Sons and their families came yesterday for Thanksgiving feast and stayed overnight. They’re all back home now. Having four kids under four in the house is both a headache and a delight!
Trump averted WWIII by stopping a plan by Biden and the Brits to start a war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, but don't look for NPR or ABC News to cover this story.
Ja ja, by this point I assume most of Congress is in on some scam they’d prefer go unnoticed. They’re above the law, honor among thieves and all, too so no worries there…
Trump lickers, suck on this; the Geneva convention says that once a boat is hit or ship wrecked, survivors are entitled to assistance. For the Department of Defense to order a second strike to “kill them all” is a war crime.
And while I guess I’m not supposed to say that because it will make some snowflake MAGAnut all mad that they’ll have to go out and shoot somebody, it’s a war crime.
We have a pre-lit artificial tree. It sheds like a real pine. It's amazing, because every year we vacuum up the needles, and it just like owning a real tree. We've had it for a decade now, and it still sheds like it did the first year. The really odd thing, it still looks brand new. You can tell it sheds by just looking at the ground, but you can't tell by looking at the branches.
It's not exactly corruption. Zelensky like every strongman has to pay off rivals in proportion to the amount of trouble they could cause. That way the various rivals are all better off with Zelensky in power than with him overthrown, which would end the payoffs. Favorite payoffs are monopoly franchises, money.
So moral outrage might not be justified. Kill off that corruption and Ukraine disintegrates because it's what's holding it together, like every third world country.
Movie recommendation: Saltburn (2023) – streaming on Amazon Prime Written and directed by Emerald Fennell Genre: Psychological thriller / black comedy A lonely, socially awkward Oxford student becomes dangerously obsessed with his wealthy, charismatic classmate. This film is either the most accidental AI allegory ever made . . . or Emerald Fennell is psychic.
Yeah, the news is full of people motivated by Trump to shoot people, "that son of a bitch Trump..." Except it's not the Trumpers doing the shooting, is it.
@RJW: went to your last link. Conservatives are not allowed to use the word ‘fight’ anymore. Just plain stupid. Are we allowed to use the word ‘stupid’ or is that word also a call to violence?
Your last link. I went to the article. Nothing about boats. Just a catalog of Trump speeches with the word ‘fight’ in them as in we have to fight to get the senate back. Calling that a call to violence. You should read your own links.
I want to talk about how tired I am of the "banned book" thing. A school system decides to "ban" (decline to provide) certain books that are easily purchased from Amazon (et al.) and are also available at one's public library. HOW IS THIS "BANNED"???
You can talk about spam folders and dissect a link for words you can or cannot say but let’s revisit this - Trump lickers, suck on this; the Geneva convention says that once a boat is hit or ship wrecked, survivors are entitled to assistance. For the Department of Defense to order a second strike to “kill them all” is a war crime.
And while I guess I’m not supposed to say that because it will make some snowflake MAGAnut all mad that they’ll have to go out and shoot somebody, it’s a war crime.
Pete Hegseth and the Trump administration will have to face to the music once he’s out of power, if the Country last that long. Hegseth might have to answer to God to when he’s asked about what he said when he saw there were two survivors.
"You can talk about spam folders and dissect a link for words you can or cannot say but let’s revisit this - Trump lickers, suck on this; the Geneva convention says that once a boat is hit or ship wrecked, survivors are entitled to assistance. For the Department of Defense to order a second strike to “kill them all” is a war crime."
Have you ever studied the war in the pacific?
So you're saying, our pilots at Midway should only have dropped ONE bomb on a Japanese carrier and then flew off because we had to come rescue the survivors?
In reality, we would strike them multiple times to SINK THEM.
So, your claim doesn't pass the WW2 smell test.
German subs used to have to rescue all the people on a sinking ship in WW1...by WW2, nobody did that much.
And yes, they would send in a second torpedo sometimes.
(Actually sometimes they WOULD help survivors...but it wasn't very often.)
You can talk about spam folders and dissect a link for words you can or cannot say but let’s revisit this - Trump lickers, suck on this; the Geneva convention says that once a boat is hit or ship wrecked, survivors are entitled to assistance. For the Department of Defense to order a second strike to “kill them all” is a war crime.
And while I guess I’m not supposed to say that because it will make some snowflake MAGAnut all mad that they’ll have to go out and shoot somebody, it’s a war crime.
Of course this traitor wants to throw US soldiers in jail for killing men who get in boats with guns and drugs in a foreign country with the goal of invading the United States.
He gives aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States and supports their efforts to attack us.
“Indiana state Senator Michael Bohacek, a Republican, said on Friday that he will vote against a redistricting plan supported by President Donald Trump, citing his “insulting and derogatory references” after he called Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, a Democrat, "seriously retarded" in a Truth Social post.”
Pete Hegseth and the Trump administration will have to face to the music once he’s out of power, if the Country last that long. Hegseth might have to answer to God to when he’s asked about what he said when he saw there were two survivors.
Two men who are in a boat full of guns and drugs who still want to invade the United State and attack our country.
Of course a traitor like you wants to give aid and comfort to the enemies of our people.
Aaron, The WW2 analogy doesn’t apply here. Modern law of armed conflict isn’t judged by Midway or U-boat tactics—it’s judged by post-WW2 treaties and customary law.
Striking a hostile vessel multiple times to sink it is lawful. Intentionally targeting survivors who are hors de combat is not.
Those are two completely different actions under today’s Geneva Convention standards.
So the legal question isn’t ‘did they attack twice?’
It’s: was the second strike aimed at an ongoing military threat (the vessel), or at people who were already out of the fight?
That’s the line between lawful action and a war crime in modern law.
“Denial of Quarter This term is used in such expressions as “to give no quarter” or “cry quarter”; in regard to hostilities by land, sea or air, denial of quarter means refusing to spare the life of anybody, even of persons manifestly unable to defend themselves or who clearly express their intention to surrender.
International humanitarian law prohibits the use of this procedure, that is, ordering that there shall be no survivors, threatening the adversary therewith, or conducting hostilities on this basis.
Denial of quarter is a grave breach of international humanitarian law.”
How much does Trump really care about keeping drugs out of the US?
“President Trump announced on Friday afternoon his intention to grant “a Full and Complete Pardon” to a former president of Honduras, Juan Orlando Hernández, who was found guilty by an American jury last year of conspiring to import cocaine into the United States in a sweeping drug case.”
“Denial of Quarter This term is used in such expressions as “to give no quarter” or “cry quarter”; in regard to hostilities by land, sea or air, denial of quarter means refusing to spare the life of anybody, even of persons manifestly unable to defend themselves or who clearly express their intention to surrender.
International humanitarian law prohibits the use of this procedure, that is, ordering that there shall be no survivors, threatening the adversary therewith, or conducting hostilities on this basis.
Denial of quarter is a grave breach of international humanitarian law.”
Of course you would consult international law to attack our country. You want our soldiers thrown in prison for carrying out the orders of our lawfully elected president based on the laws of foreign nations.
You really need to get the fuck out of our country and go live with the people whose side you are on.
Original Mike said... "I would might revisit my links Eva but every time I reload the page, they’ve disappeared."
I take it this was from that gaslighting dipshit who thinks he's an intellectual.
I don't think they are being spam foldered because the welcome words "Comment by Ronald J. Ward blocked." have been appearing pretty frequently in this thread.
The dumbass is probably not reloading the page, he's hitting the 'go back' arrow which does cause the comment you just published to disappear because your browser goes back to the last version of the page that was loaded. It threw me the first time it happened but I pretty quickly realized what it was.
Aaron, The WW2 analogy doesn’t apply here. Modern law of armed conflict isn’t judged by Midway or U-boat tactics—it’s judged by post-WW2 treaties and customary law.
Striking a hostile vessel multiple times to sink it is lawful. Intentionally targeting survivors who are hors de combat is not.
Those are two completely different actions under today’s Geneva Convention standards.
So the legal question isn’t ‘did they attack twice?’
It’s: was the second strike aimed at an ongoing military threat (the vessel), or at people who were already out of the fight?
That’s the line between lawful action and a war crime in modern law.
Let's see.
Does the United States subject its soldiers to international law?
No?
So it is only traitorous fucks like you want our soldiers put in jail based on international law then.
We know you are more concerned about Afghan soldiers than US soldiers. Now you make it clear you are more concerned about Venezuelan drug dealers than American Soldiers.
Keep it up. Please make it clear as day who you support.
Achillies, the U.S. absolutely does subject its servicemembers to law in combat—our own.
The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), U.S. Rules of Engagement (ROE), and the Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC) are all mandatory for American troops.
Those are U.S. laws and U.S. rules, not ‘foreign’ courts.
And LOAC isn’t optional; every U.S. service member is trained in it. Violations can be prosecuted in U.S. military courts.
That’s not me ‘siding with Venezuela’—that’s how the U.S. military operates.
Supporting American troops means supporting the legal standards they themselves are required to follow.
Pretending those rules don’t exist doesn’t protect them—it puts them at risk.
So this isn’t about defending Venezuelans, Afghans, or anyone else. It’s about staying consistent with the laws our own military imposes on its own people.
“The US military subjects its soldiers to international law through training, mandatory compliance with the law of armed conflict, and the requirement to disobey unlawful orders. US law incorporates international law, and service members' oaths are to the Constitution, which includes international treaties and the law of war.”
“Incorporation into US law: US law automatically incorporates international law, according to theforge.defence.gov.au. This is a long-standing principle affirmed by the US Supreme Court.”
"International humanitarian law prohibits the use of this procedure, that is, ordering that there shall be no survivors, threatening the adversary therewith, or conducting hostilities on this basis."
Well, let's take a look at this, shall we?
"prohibits the use of this procedure, that is, ordering that there shall be no survivors"
Were these orders issued? Evidence of such, please.
"threatening the adversary therewith"
Were the adversaries advised that such orders had, in fact, been issued? Again... evidence, please.
"or conducting hostilities on this [no survivors] basis"
It's necessary to insure that there must be survivors? Really?
“The US military subjects its soldiers to international law through training, mandatory compliance with the law of armed conflict, and the requirement to disobey unlawful orders. US law incorporates international law, and service members' oaths are to the Constitution, which includes international treaties and the law of war.”
“Incorporation into US law: US law automatically incorporates international law, according to theforge.defence.gov.au. This is a long-standing principle affirmed by the US Supreme Court.”
Maybe you should stop talking to Gemini and go talk to your daughter.
She might tell you what Rules of Engagement are and who makes them.
Then you wouldn't sound like a stupid traitorous retard.
Um- so far the talk of that order being given is from "unnamed advisors". Unnamed advisors- hmm..
No credible reporting. Everyone in the chain of command would recognize that as an unlawful order. Immediately. I give no credence to "unnamed advisors".
And if named people come forward and are registered democrats, I'd give less credence then that.
Repeating such allegations or stating they're true without proof is libel or slander, actionable libel or slander, and is going to cost.
The MSM report https://archive.is/XaZrB. And Todd Huntley, former military lawyer, is blowing smoke out his rectum. I poste links to two, not one, but two laws on the books in US Code that specifically authorize firing upon smugglers/pirates/stateless vessels.
Ronald J Ward at 552 - I am a 2024 DJT voter. Sat out 2020 and 2016. I am not MAGA, but self identify Conservative. FO and war crime talk can fuck off.FO, seriously, FO.
...“Indiana state Senator Michael Bohacek, a Republican, said on Friday that he will vote against a redistricting plan supported by President Donald Trump, citing his “insulting and derogatory references”....
Think of it as a litmus test, and he came up blue. I'm sure his constituents will be eternally grateful for his cunning plan of revenge for Mean Tweets that will leave their state at a disadvantage by next year's election.
Regarding "Giving quarter". The Israelis when they attacked the USS Liberty not only attacked the ship, they strafed sailors in the water. But then Israel doesn't believe in Western Civilized Warfare. That's why they murder women and Children in Gaza.
But that's a side point. In land combat, there's no obligation to recieve a surrender. For example, when General Wainwright surrended the troops to General Homma at Corregidor, he decline the surrender and demanded Wainwright surrender all the troops in the Philippines. Harsh, but not against international law - at the time.
In air warfare shooting at enemy in parachutes is considered unsporting, but I doubt its against international law.
Trump to Pardon Honduran Ex-President Serving 45-Year Drug Sentence ~ WSJ
Whether it’s Biden pardoning kids who were caught with a couple ounces of weed or Trump pardoning the Honduran president who smuggled in 400 tons of cocaine, both presidents were soft on drugs.
Wonder how much Trump is being paid for the pardon.
Suppose Trump responds to the press politely and apologetically the next time he's targeted by a 'gotcha' question. Do you suppose the reaction will be "Gee- maybe we misread the guy. He's really not as bad as we've been making him out to be."
I remember in the second Iraqi war a marine, being the last the leave the building, put a bullet in the head of all the corpses. Over the top? Against, "humanitarian law"? The conspiracy of billionaires?
Killing people without any legal basis in boats on the open sea, while releasing the trafficker of 400 tons of drugs from an American prison. Breathtaking hypocrisy even by Trump's standards.
"The Thick of It" is a British political drama featuring Peter Capaldi (former Dr. Who actor) as an enforcer. It is flippin' brilliant.
I cannot stand endless mood setting music and tone setting. This show goes so far in the other direction. It is is non stop dialogue. Exhausting with its pace, but endlessly entertaining.
The show was created by and produced by Armondo Iannucci, who was also in Death Of Stalin. It is a non-stop sequence of fast paced brutal humor. Think "Yes Minister", but far more modern and cutting.
I'll need to watch it twice to get half the jokes, and I lived in the UK for over a decade.
Kakistocracy said... Killing people without any legal basis in boats on the open sea, 14 USC 637: Stopping vessels; immunity for firing at or into vessel https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-2000-title14-section637&num=0&edition=2000
14 U.S. Code § 526 - Stopping vessels; indemnity for firing at or into vessel https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/14/526
Here's the two laws that say you can, indeed, do just that. Covers smugglers, pirates, and stateless vessels. Now find me a law that says the government is prohibited from doing so. As for the kill order?
The following is quoted from X, and the link to the thread https://x.com/SeanParnellUSA/status/1994556986768155105
Sean Parnell @SeanParnellUSA We told the Washington Post that this entire narrative was false yesterday. These people just fabricate anonymously sourced stories out of whole cloth. Fake News is the enemy of the people.
Rusty, what you’re describing sounds more like something from a TV dramatization than from actual Marine Corps protocol. U.S. forces operate under LOAC, ROE, and UCMJ—not movie rules—and every actual rational minded Marine knows the difference.
She is just a simple minded nurse who knows better than people who are far more intelligent, experienced and intellectually sophisticated than she is."
As for hitting the boat a second time, that's just the Lie of the Day followed by the Pearl Clutching of the Day to be followed by the Deep Sixing of the Previous and Now Debunked Lie of the Day to Make Room for Today's Lie of the Day.
Rusty, what you’re describing sounds more like something from a TV dramatization than from actual Marine Corps protocol. U.S. forces operate under LOAC, ROE, and UCMJ—not movie rules—and every actual rational minded Marine knows the difference.
It is hilarious to watch this retard thinks he knows what rational minded Marines know. I bet you watched some really cool documentaries on youtube.
Standard react to contact battle drill:
Engaged unit achieves fire superiority and suppression. Trailing unit flanks and sweeps across perpendicular to the engaged unit clearing across. Once they have advanced and cleared the field of fire the engaged unit clears forward.
We did this drill over and over again. Both teams shot everyone they saw. On both sweeps. If they looked dead you still shot them.
You are just a know nothing idiot.
It was only after Barrack Obama became President that the ROEs were changed to make it so that more of us got killed.
Because getting more of us killed was always the Democrats goal.
"[the Geneva convention says that once a boat is hit or ship wrecked, survivors are entitled to assistance."
Secretary Hegseth reportedly ordered the Venezuelan boat to be destroyed as soon as he learned there was no cocaine aboard.
On the one hand, Hegseth keeps ordering murders. On the other hand, that’s what he was appointed to do.
The word "reportedly" does a lot of work for traitors working with our foreign enemies to attack Americans.
It isn't the Cocaine that gets them killed.
It is going to be the guns that get them killed. As soon as a weapon is PID'd and intent is established they are valid targets. As soon as someone is maneuvering with a weapon they get shot.
I know it makes no difference to the idiots on this thread defending drug smugglers, but just what is your solution to stopping - or at least restricting - the hundreds of millions of dollars worth of drugs coming into the country?
Frankly, I don't care how they're taken out. And if that gets your undies in a bunch, I don't care about that, either.
Would it ever occur to you if somebody was doing this years and years ago, the streets of our cities wouldn't be filled with half-dead, drooling zombies?
Charlie Sheen was interviewed by Megyn Kelly a week or so ago (and he was previously interviewed by Joe Rogan) during which he discussed his own personal political migration over the last year. One year ago he voted for Kamala. When she lost, he was in despair. Flashbacks from the first Trump term where he was constantly angry and had trouble sleeping. And the first year of his second term was going to coincide with his return to public life in order to promote a documentary and book he helped create about himself. CS decided he had to find an off ramp. Decided that for all the big decisions in his life he had always done the research himself and decided for himself. Yet in politics he was getting 'fed' his political positions by the MSM. So he decided to take a closer look. Where he ended up he's very careful not to say. He's not saying he's a Trumper. He is saying he's on the right, using taxes as the reason. So he's leaving the Democrats but staying away from MAGA so he can still potentially get a new TV show. Seems likely to make him unemployable in Woke Hollywood. Or could be the start of a preference cascade ht Gavin Newsom.
No normal citizen cares about the technical legality of it. If it might be illegal, Trump can just issue pardons before he leaves office and problem solved, right?
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.
I am a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for me to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Encourage Althouse by making a donation:
Make a 1-time donation or set up a monthly donation of any amount you choose:
90 comments:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aY_ag5tJ6jE&t=109s
So Zelensky's left hand man, who was implicated in this corruption, fled the country, and now his right hand man has been forced to resign.
Maybe it's $50 to $100 billion stolen from the Ukrainian money, which is no surprise given Biden's standard kickback of 10% and the hundreds of billions we, and Europe sent there.
How clean must Trump be if he can have decades of his business and tax records combed through by his political enemies, and the best they can come up with is made up crimes, but it looks like the money went, not just through Europe, via Estonia, but several US Congressmen are implicated. The reason they hate Trump is because he doesn't dip his beak, like they do, it makes them worried. There is an old mafia saying, "The only way to deal with an honest cop is to put him down."
Sons and their families came yesterday for Thanksgiving feast and stayed overnight. They’re all back home now. Having four kids under four in the house is both a headache and a delight!
The pillar of light coming from the setting in sun in the third picture is striking.
Trump averted WWIII by stopping a plan by Biden and the Brits to start a war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, but don't look for NPR or ABC News to cover this story.
https://youtu.be/OCNQ4m7v6U0?si=QzRCYrNnhAzOI-L0&t=1462
Ja ja, by this point I assume most of Congress is in on some scam they’d prefer go unnoticed. They’re above the law, honor among thieves and all, too so no worries there…
The calm before the storm
Christmas tree went up this afternoon. Will take many days to decorate it. Was a challenge, because it started out a bit taller than fits.
I would guess the middle one
Trump lickers, suck on this; the Geneva convention says that once a boat is hit or ship wrecked, survivors are entitled to assistance. For the Department of Defense to order a second strike to “kill them all” is a war crime.
And while I guess I’m not supposed to say that because it will make some snowflake MAGAnut all mad that they’ll have to go out and shoot somebody, it’s a war crime.
We have a pre-lit artificial tree. It sheds like a real pine. It's amazing, because every year we vacuum up the needles, and it just like owning a real tree. We've had it for a decade now, and it still sheds like it did the first year. The really odd thing, it still looks brand new. You can tell it sheds by just looking at the ground, but you can't tell by looking at the branches.
It's not exactly corruption. Zelensky like every strongman has to pay off rivals in proportion to the amount of trouble they could cause. That way the various rivals are all better off with Zelensky in power than with him overthrown, which would end the payoffs. Favorite payoffs are monopoly franchises, money.
So moral outrage might not be justified. Kill off that corruption and Ukraine disintegrates because it's what's holding it together, like every third world country.
Movie recommendation:
Saltburn (2023) – streaming on Amazon Prime
Written and directed by Emerald Fennell
Genre: Psychological thriller / black comedy
A lonely, socially awkward Oxford student becomes dangerously obsessed with his wealthy, charismatic classmate.
This film is either the most accidental AI allegory ever made . . . or Emerald Fennell is psychic.
"they’ll have to go out and shoot somebody,"
Yeah, the news is full of people motivated by Trump to shoot people, "that son of a bitch Trump..." Except it's not the Trumpers doing the shooting, is it.
Thanks Leland. Your shedding-fake-Christmas-tree story wins the "Heartwarming Holiday Story of the Year Award.'
@RJW: went to your last link. Conservatives are not allowed to use the word ‘fight’ anymore. Just plain stupid. Are we allowed to use the word ‘stupid’ or is that word also a call to violence?
Don’t really know what you’re talking about Eva and I don’t know you controls your vocabulary.
I was talking about Trump murdering boat attack survivors.
But since you brought up my “last link”, I do wonder why my list of links keep disappearing.
because it will make some snowflake MAGAnut all mad that they’ll have to go out and shoot somebody
If we were half as violent as you accuse of us being... you'd already be dead, boy.
Your last link. I went to the article. Nothing about boats. Just a catalog of Trump speeches with the word ‘fight’ in them as in we have to fight to get the senate back. Calling that a call to violence. You should read your own links.
I would might revisit my links Eva but every time I reload the page, they’ve disappeared.
I want to talk about how tired I am of the "banned book" thing. A school system decides to "ban" (decline to provide) certain books that are easily purchased from Amazon (et al.) and are also available at one's public library. HOW IS THIS "BANNED"???
"I would might revisit my links Eva but every time I reload the page, they’ve disappeared."
You're being spammed-foldered. Are you seriously going to claim you don't know what's going on?
1. Apparently Blogger has a stupidity detector.
2. Surely you have access to your own links.
spam-foldered
You can talk about spam folders and dissect a link for words you can or cannot say but let’s revisit this - Trump lickers, suck on this; the Geneva convention says that once a boat is hit or ship wrecked, survivors are entitled to assistance. For the Department of Defense to order a second strike to “kill them all” is a war crime.
And while I guess I’m not supposed to say that because it will make some snowflake MAGAnut all mad that they’ll have to go out and shoot somebody, it’s a war crime.
Somebody seems like he has gotten into the holiday 'spirits,' anyway.
Pete Hegseth and the Trump administration will have to face to the music once he’s out of power, if the Country last that long. Hegseth might have to answer to God to when he’s asked about what he said when he saw there were two survivors.
“Trump lickers, suck on this”
Why should I read anything past that?
Man, these pests are starting to get feisty!
You shouldn’t, if the truth is that uncomfortable for you.
After Trump calls Walz “retarded”, Walz tells Trump to release his MRI results, good comeback Governor Walz.
"You can talk about spam folders and dissect a link for words you can or cannot say but let’s revisit this - Trump lickers, suck on this; the Geneva convention says that once a boat is hit or ship wrecked, survivors are entitled to assistance. For the Department of Defense to order a second strike to “kill them all” is a war crime."
Have you ever studied the war in the pacific?
So you're saying, our pilots at Midway should only have dropped ONE bomb on a Japanese carrier and then flew off because we had to come rescue the survivors?
In reality, we would strike them multiple times to SINK THEM.
So, your claim doesn't pass the WW2 smell test.
German subs used to have to rescue all the people on a sinking ship in WW1...by WW2, nobody did that much.
And yes, they would send in a second torpedo sometimes.
(Actually sometimes they WOULD help survivors...but it wasn't very often.)
Insults don’t merit consideration.
I'll wait for Inga to explain how World War II was "different" and it was okay to hit damaged ships a second time.
LOL.
Ronald J. Ward said...
You can talk about spam folders and dissect a link for words you can or cannot say but let’s revisit this - Trump lickers, suck on this; the Geneva convention says that once a boat is hit or ship wrecked, survivors are entitled to assistance. For the Department of Defense to order a second strike to “kill them all” is a war crime.
And while I guess I’m not supposed to say that because it will make some snowflake MAGAnut all mad that they’ll have to go out and shoot somebody, it’s a war crime.
Of course this traitor wants to throw US soldiers in jail for killing men who get in boats with guns and drugs in a foreign country with the goal of invading the United States.
He gives aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States and supports their efforts to attack us.
“Indiana state Senator Michael Bohacek, a Republican, said on Friday that he will vote against a redistricting plan supported by President Donald Trump, citing his “insulting and derogatory references” after he called Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, a Democrat, "seriously retarded" in a Truth Social post.”
https://www.newsweek.com/republican-to-oppose-trumps-redistricting-due-to-derogatory-remark-11127971
Inga said...
Pete Hegseth and the Trump administration will have to face to the music once he’s out of power, if the Country last that long. Hegseth might have to answer to God to when he’s asked about what he said when he saw there were two survivors.
Two men who are in a boat full of guns and drugs who still want to invade the United State and attack our country.
Of course a traitor like you wants to give aid and comfort to the enemies of our people.
Well theres his sign now jazx hands walz is more a lesuo tool ofthe chinese and other parties
Aaron, The WW2 analogy doesn’t apply here. Modern law of armed conflict isn’t judged by Midway or U-boat tactics—it’s judged by post-WW2 treaties and customary law.
Striking a hostile vessel multiple times to sink it is lawful.
Intentionally targeting survivors who are hors de combat is not.
Those are two completely different actions under today’s Geneva Convention standards.
So the legal question isn’t ‘did they attack twice?’
It’s: was the second strike aimed at an ongoing military threat (the vessel), or at people who were already out of the fight?
That’s the line between lawful action and a war crime in modern law.
“Denial of Quarter
This term is used in such expressions as “to give no quarter” or “cry quarter”; in regard to hostilities by land, sea or air, denial of quarter means refusing to spare the life of anybody, even of persons manifestly unable to defend themselves or who clearly express their intention to surrender.
International humanitarian law prohibits the use of this procedure, that is, ordering that there shall be no survivors, threatening the adversary therewith, or conducting hostilities on this basis.
Denial of quarter is a grave breach of international humanitarian law.”
https://casebook.icrc.org/a_to_z/glossary/quarter-denial
Maybe they should take thd hint and stop sending out drug boats
The report of a woman being set on fire on a Chicago train recently seems to have dropped out of the news cycle.
I wonder if the fact that Trump can't be blamed for it by even the most rabid leftist has anything to do with that?
How much does Trump really care about keeping drugs out of the US?
“President Trump announced on Friday afternoon his intention to grant “a Full and Complete Pardon” to a former president of Honduras, Juan Orlando Hernández, who was found guilty by an American jury last year of conspiring to import cocaine into the United States in a sweeping drug case.”
NYT
"Striking a hostile vessel multiple times to sink it is lawful."
So you're going to claim that we "strafed the water" with a missile, right?
How fast was the second missile arriving after the first?
Igna is not a traitor, Achilles.
She is just a simple minded nurse who knows better than people who are far more intelligent, experienced and intellectually sophisticated than she is.
IOW, she is the Democrat base.
I think we have seen a single mussile strike per boats
Inga said...
“Denial of Quarter
This term is used in such expressions as “to give no quarter” or “cry quarter”; in regard to hostilities by land, sea or air, denial of quarter means refusing to spare the life of anybody, even of persons manifestly unable to defend themselves or who clearly express their intention to surrender.
International humanitarian law prohibits the use of this procedure, that is, ordering that there shall be no survivors, threatening the adversary therewith, or conducting hostilities on this basis.
Denial of quarter is a grave breach of international humanitarian law.”
Of course you would consult international law to attack our country. You want our soldiers thrown in prison for carrying out the orders of our lawfully elected president based on the laws of foreign nations.
You really need to get the fuck out of our country and go live with the people whose side you are on.
Well she vouches for traitors terrorists criminals so qed
Hey, anyone else here try the Kraft apple pie macaroni and cheese for Thanksgiving?
Original Mike said...
"I would might revisit my links Eva but every time I reload the page, they’ve disappeared."
I take it this was from that gaslighting dipshit who thinks he's an intellectual.
I don't think they are being spam foldered because the welcome words "Comment by Ronald J. Ward blocked." have been appearing pretty frequently in this thread.
The dumbass is probably not reloading the page, he's hitting the 'go back' arrow which does cause the comment you just published to disappear because your browser goes back to the last version of the page that was loaded. It threw me the first time it happened but I pretty quickly realized what it was.
That seems wrong on a number of levels
Ronald J. Ward said...
Aaron, The WW2 analogy doesn’t apply here. Modern law of armed conflict isn’t judged by Midway or U-boat tactics—it’s judged by post-WW2 treaties and customary law.
Striking a hostile vessel multiple times to sink it is lawful.
Intentionally targeting survivors who are hors de combat is not.
Those are two completely different actions under today’s Geneva Convention standards.
So the legal question isn’t ‘did they attack twice?’
It’s: was the second strike aimed at an ongoing military threat (the vessel), or at people who were already out of the fight?
That’s the line between lawful action and a war crime in modern law.
Let's see.
Does the United States subject its soldiers to international law?
No?
So it is only traitorous fucks like you want our soldiers put in jail based on international law then.
We know you are more concerned about Afghan soldiers than US soldiers. Now you make it clear you are more concerned about Venezuelan drug dealers than American Soldiers.
Keep it up. Please make it clear as day who you support.
Oh please Aaron, if you want me to consider taking the bait, at least make it appealing?
I’m not claiming anything about ‘strafing the water.’
What I am saying is that legality depends on the status of the target at the time of the second strike—not the number of minutes between missiles.
If the vessel was still considered a valid military threat (assuming for argument that it ever was) a second missile is lawful.
If the vessel was disabled and only survivors remained, intentionally targeting those survivors would not be lawful.
The timing only matters insofar as it indicates which of those two conditions existed.
So before we can debate minutes or seconds, we’d need to establish a factual point:
Was the vessel still an active military target when the second missile was fired?
If you think about it cheese is often paired with apples. Then there’s apple pie topped with a slice of cheddar cheese.
I would rather have a scoop of ice cream on top
Achillies, the U.S. absolutely does subject its servicemembers to law in combat—our own.
The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), U.S. Rules of Engagement (ROE), and the Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC) are all mandatory for American troops.
Those are U.S. laws and U.S. rules, not ‘foreign’ courts.
And LOAC isn’t optional; every U.S. service member is trained in it. Violations can be prosecuted in U.S. military courts.
That’s not me ‘siding with Venezuela’—that’s how the U.S. military operates.
Supporting American troops means supporting the legal standards they themselves are required to follow.
Pretending those rules don’t exist doesn’t protect them—it puts them at risk.
So this isn’t about defending Venezuelans, Afghans, or anyone else. It’s about staying consistent with the laws our own military imposes on its own people.
Always interesting reading military analysis from those without military experience.
Sure, apple pie, cheddar cheese, ice cream on top - with a pickle.
“The US military subjects its soldiers to international law through training, mandatory compliance with the law of armed conflict, and the requirement to disobey unlawful orders. US law incorporates international law, and service members' oaths are to the Constitution, which includes international treaties and the law of war.”
“Incorporation into US law: US law automatically incorporates international law, according to theforge.defence.gov.au. This is a long-standing principle affirmed by the US Supreme Court.”
Gemini
"International humanitarian law prohibits the use of this procedure, that is, ordering that there shall be no survivors, threatening the adversary therewith, or conducting hostilities on this basis."
Well, let's take a look at this, shall we?
"prohibits the use of this procedure, that is, ordering that there shall be no survivors"
Were these orders issued? Evidence of such, please.
"threatening the adversary therewith"
Were the adversaries advised that such orders had, in fact, been issued? Again... evidence, please.
"or conducting hostilities on this [no survivors] basis"
It's necessary to insure that there must be survivors? Really?
Ronald J. Ward said...
Achillies, the U.S. absolutely does subject its servicemembers to law in combat—our own.
Yeah, I know. I actually did that.
I remember you fucks trying to get us thrown in jail then too.
You have always hated us and you hate our country.
What’s with all the spaces in the comment section. My thumb hurts from all the scrolling I have to do now
Inga said...
“The US military subjects its soldiers to international law through training, mandatory compliance with the law of armed conflict, and the requirement to disobey unlawful orders. US law incorporates international law, and service members' oaths are to the Constitution, which includes international treaties and the law of war.”
“Incorporation into US law: US law automatically incorporates international law, according to theforge.defence.gov.au. This is a long-standing principle affirmed by the US Supreme Court.”
Maybe you should stop talking to Gemini and go talk to your daughter.
She might tell you what Rules of Engagement are and who makes them.
Then you wouldn't sound like a stupid traitorous retard.
Um- so far the talk of that order being given is from "unnamed advisors". Unnamed advisors- hmm..
No credible reporting. Everyone in the chain of command would recognize that as an unlawful order. Immediately. I give no credence to "unnamed advisors".
And if named people come forward and are registered democrats, I'd give less credence then that.
Repeating such allegations or stating they're true without proof is libel or slander, actionable libel or slander, and is going to cost.
The MSM report https://archive.is/XaZrB. And Todd Huntley, former military lawyer, is blowing smoke out his rectum. I poste links to two, not one, but two laws on the books in US Code that specifically authorize firing upon smugglers/pirates/stateless vessels.
Ronald J Ward at 552 - I am a 2024 DJT voter. Sat out 2020 and 2016. I am not MAGA, but self identify Conservative. FO and war crime talk can fuck off.FO, seriously, FO.
We killed all those Japanese soldiers and sailors without due process! It was okay to do that to Germans, cuz they were racists
I also remember when Barrack Obama became President and when he changed our ROE's.
President Barrack Obama changed our ROE's just as Ronald J Ward and Inga wanted.
President Barrack Obama changed our ROEs so that as many of us would be killed as possible.
...“Indiana state Senator Michael Bohacek, a Republican, said on Friday that he will vote against a redistricting plan supported by President Donald Trump, citing his “insulting and derogatory references”....
Think of it as a litmus test, and he came up blue. I'm sure his constituents will be eternally grateful for his cunning plan of revenge for Mean Tweets that will leave their state at a disadvantage by next year's election.
Mason G, so you’re still in the “they didn’t do it” or “prove they did it” phase.
I don’t see any need to argue at that level because eventually, it won’t matter. It never does.
Roe have been bonkers at least since beirut although the embassy bombings proved the point
Who scouted out the embassy bombing the egyptian col ali mohammed who also trained at ft bragg after he gave andy mccarthy the slip
"If you think about it cheese is often paired with apples. Then there’s apple pie topped with a slice of cheddar cheese."
Old cheddar cheese. That's important. Just got an apple pie for my birthday. Paired it with 12 year old cheddar.
It's time to lighten the mood.
It’s Only a Paper Moon // Joscho Stephan Trio feat. Caroline Mhlanga
Regarding "Giving quarter". The Israelis when they attacked the USS Liberty not only attacked the ship, they strafed sailors in the water. But then Israel doesn't believe in Western Civilized Warfare. That's why they murder women and Children in Gaza.
But that's a side point. In land combat, there's no obligation to recieve a surrender. For example, when General Wainwright surrended the troops to General Homma at Corregidor, he decline the surrender and demanded Wainwright surrender all the troops in the Philippines. Harsh, but not against international law - at the time.
In air warfare shooting at enemy in parachutes is considered unsporting, but I doubt its against international law.
I'm not wild about a lot of Trump's rhetoric, but let's be honest, Walz is retarded as is his wife.
Trump to Pardon Honduran Ex-President Serving 45-Year Drug Sentence ~ WSJ
Whether it’s Biden pardoning kids who were caught with a couple ounces of weed or Trump pardoning the Honduran president who smuggled in 400 tons of cocaine, both presidents were soft on drugs.
Wonder how much Trump is being paid for the pardon.
"I'm not wild about a lot of Trump's rhetoric..."
Suppose Trump responds to the press politely and apologetically the next time he's targeted by a 'gotcha' question. Do you suppose the reaction will be "Gee- maybe we misread the guy. He's really not as bad as we've been making him out to be."
Yeah, me neither.
I remember in the second Iraqi war a marine, being the last the leave the building, put a bullet in the head of all the corpses.
Over the top? Against, "humanitarian law"? The conspiracy of billionaires?
This quarter discussion is actually relevant to the Zep thread:
https://youtu.be/kW3xDZrlBQs?si=xcWmpA-RWNFYQW2k
CC, JSM
Killing people without any legal basis in boats on the open sea, while releasing the trafficker of 400 tons of drugs from an American prison. Breathtaking hypocrisy even by Trump's standards.
"The Thick of It" is a British political drama featuring Peter Capaldi (former Dr. Who actor) as an enforcer. It is flippin' brilliant.
I cannot stand endless mood setting music and tone setting. This show goes so far in the other direction. It is is non stop dialogue. Exhausting with its pace, but endlessly entertaining.
The show was created by and produced by Armondo Iannucci, who was also in Death Of Stalin. It is a non-stop sequence of fast paced brutal humor. Think "Yes Minister", but far more modern and cutting.
I'll need to watch it twice to get half the jokes, and I lived in the UK for over a decade.
"[the Geneva convention says that once a boat is hit or ship wrecked, survivors are entitled to assistance."
Secretary Hegseth reportedly ordered the Venezuelan boat to be destroyed as soon as he learned there was no cocaine aboard.
On the one hand, Hegseth keeps ordering murders. On the other hand, that’s what he was appointed to do.
Kakistocracy said...
Killing people without any legal basis in boats on the open sea,
14 USC 637: Stopping vessels; immunity for firing at or into vessel
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-2000-title14-section637&num=0&edition=2000
14 U.S. Code § 526 - Stopping vessels; indemnity for firing at or into vessel
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/14/526
Here's the two laws that say you can, indeed, do just that. Covers smugglers, pirates, and stateless vessels. Now find me a law that says the government is prohibited from doing so. As for the kill order?
The following is quoted from X, and the link to the thread https://x.com/SeanParnellUSA/status/1994556986768155105
Sean Parnell
@SeanParnellUSA
We told the Washington Post that this entire narrative was false yesterday.
These people just fabricate anonymously sourced stories out of whole cloth.
Fake News is the enemy of the people.
Rusty, what you’re describing sounds more like something from a TV dramatization than from actual Marine Corps protocol. U.S. forces operate under LOAC, ROE, and UCMJ—not movie rules—and every actual rational minded Marine knows the difference.
"Maynard said...
Igna is not a traitor, Achilles.
She is just a simple minded nurse who knows better than people who are far more intelligent, experienced and intellectually sophisticated than she is."
Great sense of humor, Maynard.
As for hitting the boat a second time, that's just the Lie of the Day followed by the Pearl Clutching of the Day to be followed by the Deep Sixing of the Previous and Now Debunked Lie of the Day to Make Room for Today's Lie of the Day.
Ronald J. Ward said...
Rusty, what you’re describing sounds more like something from a TV dramatization than from actual Marine Corps protocol. U.S. forces operate under LOAC, ROE, and UCMJ—not movie rules—and every actual rational minded Marine knows the difference.
It is hilarious to watch this retard thinks he knows what rational minded Marines know. I bet you watched some really cool documentaries on youtube.
Standard react to contact battle drill:
Engaged unit achieves fire superiority and suppression. Trailing unit flanks and sweeps across perpendicular to the engaged unit clearing across. Once they have advanced and cleared the field of fire the engaged unit clears forward.
We did this drill over and over again. Both teams shot everyone they saw. On both sweeps. If they looked dead you still shot them.
You are just a know nothing idiot.
It was only after Barrack Obama became President that the ROEs were changed to make it so that more of us got killed.
Because getting more of us killed was always the Democrats goal.
Kakistocracy said...
"[the Geneva convention says that once a boat is hit or ship wrecked, survivors are entitled to assistance."
Secretary Hegseth reportedly ordered the Venezuelan boat to be destroyed as soon as he learned there was no cocaine aboard.
On the one hand, Hegseth keeps ordering murders. On the other hand, that’s what he was appointed to do.
The word "reportedly" does a lot of work for traitors working with our foreign enemies to attack Americans.
It isn't the Cocaine that gets them killed.
It is going to be the guns that get them killed. As soon as a weapon is PID'd and intent is established they are valid targets. As soon as someone is maneuvering with a weapon they get shot.
I know it makes no difference to the idiots on this thread defending drug smugglers, but just what is your solution to stopping - or at least restricting - the hundreds of millions of dollars worth of drugs coming into the country?
Frankly, I don't care how they're taken out. And if that gets your undies in a bunch, I don't care about that, either.
Would it ever occur to you if somebody was doing this years and years ago, the streets of our cities wouldn't be filled with half-dead, drooling zombies?
Charlie Sheen was interviewed by Megyn Kelly a week or so ago (and he was previously interviewed by Joe Rogan) during which he discussed his own personal political migration over the last year. One year ago he voted for Kamala. When she lost, he was in despair. Flashbacks from the first Trump term where he was constantly angry and had trouble sleeping. And the first year of his second term was going to coincide with his return to public life in order to promote a documentary and book he helped create about himself.
CS decided he had to find an off ramp. Decided that for all the big decisions in his life he had always done the research himself and decided for himself. Yet in politics he was getting 'fed' his political positions by the MSM. So he decided to take a closer look. Where he ended up he's very careful not to say. He's not saying he's a Trumper. He is saying he's on the right, using taxes as the reason. So he's leaving the Democrats but staying away from MAGA so he can still potentially get a new TV show. Seems likely to make him unemployable in Woke Hollywood. Or could be the start of a preference cascade ht Gavin Newsom.
No normal citizen cares about the technical legality of it. If it might be illegal, Trump can just issue pardons before he leaves office and problem solved, right?
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.