BBC tows the "company line" when it comes to police harassment

In message , tony cooper
writes
On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 19:20:40 +0000, Chris H
wrote:

In message , tony cooper
writes


But only by the USA.

What are you talking about? The UK, and several other nations, have
troops in the Middle East actively participating in combat. Has the
UK declared war?

Nope... We are not at war and were not at war with either Iraq or
Afghanistan. It is a legal technicality.

In any event in Afghanistan we are supporting the Government in a police
action.

In Iraq we left when asked to do so by the government.

There are fine legal distinctions at work here. I do not know them
properly myself but have heard them explained a couple of times in the
last few years. Interestingly there is still a debate as to weather or
not the UK went into Iraq and Afghanistan illegally.

The UK never formally made a declaration of war
against the Falklands.

Then the US is not the "only" nation to engage in combat without
declaring war as you said when you replied:

and as you have
noted it's generally being abandoned anyway.

But only by the USA.

You try so hard to portray the US as the evil empire, and the UK as
some sort of paragon of virtue, but the facts don't support you. The
UK has dirty hands just like we do.

Historically yes, but the US is the country that has tried to claim the
moral high ground whilst ignoring international law.

Lets face it when it comes to torture, kidnapping, illegal detention and
redefining things there is nothing to choose between the USA, China,
N.Korea and Iran.

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

"Chris H" wrote in message
...
In message , Neil
Harrington writes

"tony cooper" wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 00:32:05 -0500, "Neil Harrington"
wrote:


"tony cooper" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 20:39:58 -0500, "Neil Harrington"
wrote:

Utter nonsense. Where on earth did you get the idea that war has to be
declared in order to exist?

International Law.

Please cite any such "International Law."


Such a polite formality as a declaration of war
is a relatively recent thing in the history of warfare,

This is true.

and as you have
noted it's generally being abandoned anyway.

But only by the USA.

By everyone. Are you really so far out in la-la land that you imagine all
the other wars of the last century to have been declared?


Chris has a lot of misconceptions about the US, but I haven't seen him
make any statement that indicates that he feels that the UK is at war
with Ireland.

Here's part of his reply to me two days ago:

________________

If you think continuing sporadic terrorism is "the war," that must mean
you
think you've never won "the war" against Ireland, after a century or so.

Correct.

We never won "the war" as there was no war

That's an incredibly lame bit of fudging, don't you think? If you thought
there was no war why didn't you just say so, instead of "Correct" -- which
clearly implies you believed such a war was still in effect.

. Anyway there are still
bombs and killing even now several this year.

Just as in Iraq. (Duh.) Now why do you believe such activities to be "war"
in Iraq but not in the UK?

Also it was never against
"Ireland"

Neither are U.S. forces at war against Iraq, and have not been since that
war was finished, about a month after it began.


It is a Police action against CIVILIAN criminals.

Same as in Iraq, then. (Duh.)

There were many groups
in Northern Ireland, PIRA, UDA (and many splinters and derivatives).
Apparently one side was Pro British and one side Anti-British. However
both sides attacked and killed British Forces, soldiers, policemen and
government officials. I was serving at the time.

Same as in Iraq, then. (Duh.)


At no time was there a War in the legal sense. There was no country to
fight. [ . . . ]

Again: Same as in Iraq, then. (Duh.)

"tony cooper" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 12:17:33 -0500, "Neil Harrington"
wrote:

No, you are not. If you use the strict sense of the word, you must
acknowledge that there never was a war in Iraq because Congress never
declared that the US was at war with Iraq. We have only been at war,
in the strict sense, five times: War of 1812, Mexican-American War,
Spanish-American War, WWI, and WWII.

Utter nonsense. Where on earth did you get the idea that war has to be
declared in order to exist? Such a polite formality as a declaration of
war
is a relatively recent thing in the history of warfare, and as you have
noted it's generally being abandoned anyway.

There's this document called "The United States Constitution" that
give me the idea in Article 1, Section 8 where it says:

The Congress shall have Power:

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules
concerning Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use
shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval
Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the
Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and
for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of
the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the
Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia
according to the discipline prescribed by Congress..

Hardly a recent thing since it goes back to the very beginning of the
United States as a nation. This document - and I'm sure you've heard
of it - does not give the President the power to declare war. The
President, as Commander-In-Chief, is given the exclusive power of
leadership of the military but does not have the constitutional power
of declaring war.

I know all that. Congress (almost unanimously I believe) delegated that
power to Bush, else he would not have made war against Iraq. I'm not aware
that Congress ever gave any such approval for war to Clinton, but he made
war against Serbia anyway.

What powers the Constitution gives or does not give to whom doesn't make
much difference if all branches of government simply ignore it. The Second
and Tenth Amendments for example are violated all the time and nothing is
done about it. Ann Coulter is probably right when she says 75% of what the
Congress does is unconstitutional.


Bush, and several other Presidents, exceeded the constitutional
limitations of the office of the presidency.

You want to use terms like "in the strict sense"? Then use them
correctly.

"War" in the strict sense means a major conflict between nations, or in the
case of "civil war," a major conflict between factions within the same
nation. It certainly does not require a declaration in order to be war, and
your continued insistence on this is just childish.



Chris has a lot of misconceptions about the US, but I haven't seen him
make any statement that indicates that he feels that the UK is at war
with Ireland.

Here's part of his reply to me two days ago:

________________

If you think continuing sporadic terrorism is "the war," that must mean
you
think you've never won "the war" against Ireland, after a century or so.

Correct.

You've put "scare quotes" around "the war". This indicates, to any
knowledgeable reader, that you are not using the word(s) in their
normal sense.

Not "scare quotes" in the first reference. I was directly quoting Chris,
hence the quotes. Of course Chris's use of "the war" was incorrect; that was
the whole point, and the reason I put distancing quotes in the second
reference.

You can read the whole post (you replied to his post also, I believe) if you
need that to clarify anything. His reply that I've quoted from above was on
Dec. 14, 3:30 AM according to my news reader.

In other words, you have not referred to a real war,
but to something similar to a war. The suppression of civil unrest is
not a war even if that suppression is enforced with armed military
forces.

EXPLAIN THAT TO CHRIS, for chrissakes. And try to understand it yourself, as
you seem to be having considerable difficulty in the same area.


Don't blame Chris when you are the one that is not writing what you
think you are writing.

I know what I'm writing. You're the one who seems to be having an awful lot
of trouble in that connection.

The Iraq war is OVER. It has been over for years. It's gone. It existeth
not. In the vernacular, it has been deep-sixed. Or in dialect, it aint dere
no mo.

If you can finally, with whatever amount of mental exertion it takes, get
that through your head, you can consider this a day well spent.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida