"Blackwater guards face prosecution in US"
Good news indeed. Most GIs detest these armed contractors. Note that MNF-I has refused to hire Blackwater inside Iraq.
Blackwater in Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bla.../
Blackwater_USA
I agree, this is good news. Thanks for posting about it, Mojo.
mojo "Blackwater guards face prosecution in US"
That's not good news. That's an indication of how far the definition of national sovereignty has been subverted these days.
A British hacker who hacked some US DoD computers from Britain gets extradited to the US to face trial there, whereas several US citizens that MASSACRED 17 Iraqis IN Iraq DON'T stand trial in Iraq at all. They get to have a "Whitewash in Washington", instead.
There's little to cheer about.
That's not good news. That's an indication of how far the definition of national sovereignty has been subverted these days.
So you are admitting Iraq is sovereign? Took you long enough! Oh, wait, you'll change your mind soon as you are done making this point, won't you? :P
So you are admitting Iraq is sovereign?
no. that is the point of the post.
"That's an indication of how far the definition of national sovereignty has been subverted these days."
Americans wouldn't last a day in Iraqi custody Bruno. And I'm not talking about the guards. Iraqi prisons are full of insurgents and terrorists,and contractors of ALL nationalities are one of their prime targets. If contractors faced the possibility of Iraqi prosecution and imprisonment,very few would venture into Iraq.....from ANYWHERE.
The biggest sticking point in the SOSA is immunity from prosecution for U.S. soldiers. Iraq wants it dropped. Not gonna happen. Never happens anywhere. Not in 80 some odd "sovereign" countries.
"The political issue of SOFAs is complicated by the fact that many host countries have mixed feelings about foreign bases on their soil, and demands to renegotiate the SOFA are often combined with calls for foreign troops to leave entirely. Issues of different national customs can arise -- while the U.S. and host countries generally agree on what constitutes a crime, many U.S. observers feel that host country justice systems grant a much weaker set of protections to the accused than the U.S. and that the host country's courts can be subject to popular pressure to deliver a guilty verdict; furthermore, that American servicemembers ordered to a foreign posting should not be forced to give up the rights they are afforded under the Bill of Rights. On the other hand, host country observers, having no local counterpart to the Bill of Rights, often feel that this is an irrelevant excuse for demanding special treatment, and resembles the extraterritorial agreements demanded by Western countries during colonialism. One host country where such sentiment is widespread, South Korea, itself has forces in Kyrgyzstan and has negotiated a SOFA that confers total immunity to its servicemembers from prosecution by Kyrgyz authorities for any crime whatsoever, something far in excess of the privileges many South Koreans object to in their nation's SOFA with the U.S.[1]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Sta...orces_Agreement
[maury] "Americans wouldn't last a day in Iraqi custody Bruno."
I don't understand. Surely Iraqis are DEEPLY GRATEFUL for the amazing LIBERATION that the US brought ... not to mention the PARADISE that Iraq has become after the reconstruction? Why would Iraqis want to hurt Americans?
[maury] "Iraqi prisons are full of insurgents and terrorists"
Ah, I see.
But then again AMERICAN jails are full of gangsters, murderers, rapists, Neonazis, black power thugs and all-round scum.
Of course, this doesn't factor into Maury's calculations.
[maury] "The biggest sticking point in the SOSA is immunity from prosecution for U.S. soldiers. Iraq wants it dropped. Not gonna happen. Never happens anywhere."
In other words, you agree with me. That's good.
[maury] "Not in 80 some odd "sovereign" countries."
I like the sneer marks. Couldn't have done it better myself.
"But then again AMERICAN jails are full of gangsters, murderers, rapists, Neonazis, black power thugs and all-round scum.
Of course, this doesn't factor into Maury's calculations."
Those "gangsters, murderers, rapists, Neonazis, black power thugs and all-round scum" generally don't believe it's their religious duty to chop American heads Bruno.
[maury] "Not in 80 some odd "sovereign" countries."
"I like the sneer marks. Couldn't have done it better myself."
No sneer intended Bruno. You can bet your ass South Africa would have the same "immunity clause" in any agreement to station its soldiers in a neighboring country. Not that South Africa would go out of its way to help anyone besides itself....
"The United States is currently party to more than 100 agreements that may be considered SOFAs.
Civil/Criminal Jurisdiction. The issue most commonly addressed in a SOFA is the legal protection from prosecution that will be afforded U.S. personnel while present in a foreign country."
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natse...sec/
RL34531.pdf
Why would a soldier stick their neck out for someone if there's the possibility of ending up imprisoned in a foreign country for the rest of their life? We've got a volunteer Army. I can't imagine many people "volunteering" for a possible future like that.
Commenting by HaloScan
