• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Ed Ofama... On Iran

cambion said:
Then let's stick to nukes, not "something." I already showed why your argument is essentially a straw man in relation to this discussion.
Click to expand...


So you never try to generalize a principle?

That's awfully limiting.
 
citizenzen said:
Because nobody ... and I mean nobody could either conduct the investigation or hold the United States accountable even if the investigation revealed they did break a treaty.
Click to expand...

How do you know? That's a pathetic excuse not to prove your claim.
 
citizenzen said:
So you never try to generalize a principle?

That's awfully limiting.
Click to expand...

Again. The United States isn't saying "we can have something and you can't" here. If you were just "generalizing a principle" then it was a non sequitur.
 
Pardalis said:
How do you know? That's a pathetic excuse not to prove your claim.
Click to expand...


United States of America, signed April, 18 1988, ratified October, 21, 1994, broken many, many times since ...


United Nations Convention Against Torture

Part I

Article 1
For the purposes of this Convention, torture means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.

This article is without prejudice to any international instrument or national legislation which does or may contain provisions of wider application.

Article 2
Each State Party shall take effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under its jurisdiction.

No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat or war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.

An order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be invoked as a justification of torture.

Article 3
No State Party shall expel, return ("refouler") or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture.

For the purpose of determining whether there are such grounds, the competent authorities shall take into account all relevant considerations including, where applicable, the existence in the State concerned of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights.

Article 4
Each State Party shall ensure that all acts of torture are offences under its criminal law. The same shall apply to an attempt to commit torture and to an act by any person which constitutes complicity or participation in torture.

Each State Party shall make these offences punishable by appropriate penalties which take into account their grave nature.​
 
Pardalis said:
No, you can easily google those treaties and find most of these threaties haven't been signed or ratified by the US, and even if they did, how can you prove they broke those they did sign?

Your entire argument is based on a faulty premise and is just a big tu quoque.
Click to expand...

do you deny that the u.s. has a history of breaking treaties?
.....yes or no....it's simple.
 
bikerdruid said:
do you deny that the u.s. has a history of breaking treaties?
.....yes or no....it's simple.
Click to expand...

Most countries have broken treaties before. This isn't about your pathological hatred of the US.

We're talking about the NPT, something very specific, and something he Iranians are accountable for.
 
citizenzen said:
United States of America, signed April, 18 1988, ratified October, 21, 1994, broken many, many times since ...


United Nations Convention Against Torture

Part I

Article 1
For the purposes of this Convention, torture means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.

This article is without prejudice to any international instrument or national legislation which does or may contain provisions of wider application.

Article 2
Each State Party shall take effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under its jurisdiction.

No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat or war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.

An order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be invoked as a justification of torture.

Article 3
No State Party shall expel, return ("refouler") or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture.

For the purpose of determining whether there are such grounds, the competent authorities shall take into account all relevant considerations including, where applicable, the existence in the State concerned of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights.

Article 4
Each State Party shall ensure that all acts of torture are offences under its criminal law. The same shall apply to an attempt to commit torture and to an act by any person which constitutes complicity or participation in torture.

Each State Party shall make these offences punishable by appropriate penalties which take into account their grave nature.​
Click to expand...

pardalis?
does the u.s. have a history of breaking treaties?
yes, or no....it's simple.
 
Pardalis said:
Does this allow Iran to break the NPT?
Click to expand...

i'll take that as a yes.
the u.s. is in no position to bitch about iran.
it should honour its own treaties before they do.

there is no evidence that iran has broken the NPT.
it is only heresay that they are working towards a bomb.
heresay that weill start a war.
the u.s. is good at going to war based on lies.
do you deny that?

vietnam and iraq were both based on u.s. lies.
 
Pardalis said:
So in this instance the NPT is meaningless and should not be enforced?
Click to expand...


I'll make a deal with you. We can uphold and enforce the NPT, right after the war trials for G.W. Bush, some of his administration, and the top military officials concludes.

Heck, I'll even go a step further and say they can happen concurrently. Conduct the war crime trials while we enforcing the NPT. Why wait?

Deal?
 
citizenzen said:
I'll make a deal with you. We can uphold and enforce the NPT, right after the war trials for G.W. Bush, some of his administration, and the top military officials concludes.

Heck, I'll even go a step further and say they can happen concurrently. Conduct the war crime trials while we enforcing the NPT. Why wait?

Deal?
Click to expand...

This isn't about your pathetic obsession with the US. One has nothing to do with the other.

Both the UN and the IAEA are concerned about Iran and want them to stick to their obligations. Do you deny the IAEA's authority on the matter?
 
Last edited:
citizenzen said:
I'll make a deal with you. We can uphold and enforce the NPT, right after the war trials for G.W. Bush, some of his administration, and the top military officials concludes.

Heck, I'll even go a step further and say they can happen concurrently. Conduct the war crime trials while we enforcing the NPT. Why wait?

Deal?
Click to expand...

No deal. You don't stop enforcing the most existentially important treaty in the history of mankind just because you feel like one of the signatories has dirty laundry of their own. That is a completely nonsensical, stupid, and dangerous proposition.
 
Pardalis said:
Both the UN and the IAEA are concerned about Iran and want them to stick to their obligations. Do you deny the IAEA's authority on the matter?
Click to expand...


I'll accept their authority when the United States accepts the authority of the United Nations and abides by the treaty it signed with them.

After all, as the U.S. has demonstrated, there is no real authority. There's just an agreement.
 
citizenzen said:
I'll accept their authority when the United States accepts the authority of the United Nations and abides by the treaty it signed with them.
Click to expand...

Then you are a fool and your argument makes no sense.

I'm tired of arguing with simpletons.
 
cambion said:
No deal. You don't stop enforcing the most existentially important treaty in the history of mankind just because you feel like one of the signatories has dirty laundry of their own. That is a completely nonsensical, stupid, and dangerous proposition.
Click to expand...


and, because of your government's actions, america is a nation of hypocrites.
are you comfortable with that?
iran has not been proven to be building a bomb, any more than iraq was proven to have had WMD's.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom