Thread: Unrest in Iraq, is anyone surprised?

Originally Posted by Laughing Man

You are speaking for a stranger. Until he says it, I'm not going to assume it. Again, shut up. You are not apart of this discussion, it was never addressed to you. I don't care what you think about it.

Are you selectively blind to things that contradict your opinions? He has explicitly stated that he understands the concept of an unlawful order and that he is not required to follow them...... more than once. This is a public forum and I can address any comment I want should I feel compelled. I don't know where you get off thinking you can tell me to shut up. The only reason I addressed it in the first place was because I sensed you were about to sidetrack the discussion with muddled arguments about an issue that was already cleared up. Lo and behold, two pages later I think anyone who has attempted to follow your train of thought is still confused as to what it is you are trying to prove.

Originally Posted by Laughing Man

Whether it is one court or multiple courts does not validate it. Hypothetically if slavery was allowed by all the Southern state courts, that does not infer that it is legitimate or correct. Having numbers does not validate an argument.
DD Form 4/1 - Military Enlistment/Reenlistment Document
Click on the DD Form 4/1 That is the contract.

Page C., nearly every section. You could have easily looked that up yourself but you insist upon being difficult.

In this case, having numbers very much does validate the argument. There isn't any logical discourse to be had here. There is no debating it. The policy is clearly written in the document. If you sign it, you agree to it. I don't think there is a moral issue here. Nobody is forcing anybody to sign anything. Slaves didn't have a choice on whether they could relinquish their freedom. Obviously that argument falls flat on its face.

Originally Posted by Laughing Man

Realize that judges can misinterpret documents. It happens. You act as though it is a done deal if some a-hole judge from some a-hole court rules upon it. It can be appealed. Though in this case it seems rather trite because the very institution that is ruling the case is the one already holding the plantiffs in custody. It's like trying to get a trial with your kidnapper as judge.

Realize that judges are the few qualified to interpret such documents and thus authorities on the matter. I just read the document and it's written clear as day. It doesn't take a judge to see it.

Quit hiding behind technicalities.