Quote:
Originally Posted by Masque
Lets put it this way as far as I and everyone else is concerned this person is a war criminal and should be treated with utter disdain and if he is not to be executed then to jail him indefinitely in solitary confinement would be a good thing and I would have the same thing done to any other war criminal or terrorist.
This would be how I would treat anyone capable of crimes against humanity and I would also treat all convicted IRA prisoners or any members of any other terrorist organisation that have killed innocent people as we cannot hang them either.
If you or anyone on this forum cannot accept that then all I can say is tough and who really cares about this being grammatically correct apart from someone who is being deliberately obtuse, if you dislike what other people have to say then do not read or even comment on their posts.
|
Nobody has suggested that where someone is found guilty of war crimes that they shouldn't be punished - that is a given.
I was merely pointing out - as you have now changed tack and acknowledged - that certain punishments which might be your and others preferred outcome in the event that he is convicted are not an option in the real world.
I invite you
again to highlight where I have swopped and changed my view in this thread or on this subject.
That aside I'll read and comment on posts where I see fit thank you.
---------- Post added at 08:40 ---------- Previous post was at 08:34 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sirius
So what do we do with those found guilty of the worst crimes against humanity if there are those who would have us do nothing in case it breaks the many rules used as a get out of jail card.
|
You punish & treat them as the law allows you to - you do not descend to their level of feral inhumanity. That is what makes law abiding, decent citizens "better" than criminals in the eyes of society.
Nobody, and certainly not I, has said that nothing should be done to people found guilty of such crimes.