View Single Post
Old 20-09-2016, 22:19   #131
Damien
Remoaner
Cable Forum Team
 
Damien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 32,882
Damien has a lot of silver blingDamien has a lot of silver blingDamien has a lot of silver blingDamien has a lot of silver blingDamien has a lot of silver bling
Damien has a lot of silver blingDamien has a lot of silver blingDamien has a lot of silver blingDamien has a lot of silver blingDamien has a lot of silver blingDamien has a lot of silver blingDamien has a lot of silver blingDamien has a lot of silver blingDamien has a lot of silver blingDamien has a lot of silver blingDamien has a lot of silver blingDamien has a lot of silver blingDamien has a lot of silver bling
Re: US Election 2016

Quote:
Originally Posted by adzii_nufc View Post
Then nothing. There's no requirement. As per the constitution:
Where is that in the constitution? I assume it's a recent amendment.

Quote:
But commanders wouldn't refuse that order, they have no issue dropping missiles on civilians elsewhere so why would this make a difference? See the problem there...
Well they do have an issue with it. America and Britain have pretty strict rules of engagement when conducting military operations in civilian areas.

There is a a big difference between civilians dying in military operations targeting an enemy and civilians being intentionally targeted. If you have evidence of the Americans intentionally setting out to kill civilians, i.e not as a result of a botched operation, then that's different. However if the Americans wanted to kill civilians they could do so easily and level whole cities in moments.

Trump has suggested intentionally killing them. It's a huge difference and it's a measure of how screwed up this situation has become that instead of it automatically disqualifying him we're debating if the constitution allows it.
Damien is online now