1,516
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 15:
Line 15: + +
Debate:Should U.S. troops be subject to Iraqi law if that allows our continued presence there? (view source)
Revision as of 21:43, July 14, 2008
, 21:43, July 14, 2008→Yes
But taken as a separate debate, whether or not U.S. troops should be subject to Iraqi law under a new security arrangement, I think it is a definitive Yes. To operate outside the realm of Iraqi law will continue to foster an insurgency that sees the U.S. forces as Occupiers. Look at the response by the Iraqis after the Blackwater fiasco. Not only did it inflame tensions between the citizens and the military, but the Blackwater forces aren't held responsible under U.S. law either. To continue to place ourselves outside the realm of the law of the country we are occupying would just continue to fan the flames of American discontent and would lead to a worsening of relations. --[[User:Jareddr|Jareddr]] 17:35, 14 July 2008 (EDT)
But taken as a separate debate, whether or not U.S. troops should be subject to Iraqi law under a new security arrangement, I think it is a definitive Yes. To operate outside the realm of Iraqi law will continue to foster an insurgency that sees the U.S. forces as Occupiers. Look at the response by the Iraqis after the Blackwater fiasco. Not only did it inflame tensions between the citizens and the military, but the Blackwater forces aren't held responsible under U.S. law either. To continue to place ourselves outside the realm of the law of the country we are occupying would just continue to fan the flames of American discontent and would lead to a worsening of relations. --[[User:Jareddr|Jareddr]] 17:35, 14 July 2008 (EDT)
::I agree with you in principle, but in practical terms a military force can't be effective if they need to be concerned with the civilian laws of foreign nations as well as the military laws and rules of engagement they are bound by. This is one reason that the training, missions and constraints of military and police forces are different, and why the former is not a substitute for the latter. --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 17:43, 14 July 2008 (EDT)
== No ==
== No ==
This is an unacceptable condition, and while the Iraq government has good reason to insist on it in order to maintain sovereign control of what happens within their nation, our military cannot operate on that basis. We are better off leaving if we can't agree on a waiver of immunity. --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 17:29, 14 July 2008 (EDT)
This is an unacceptable condition, and while the Iraq government has good reason to insist on it in order to maintain sovereign control of what happens within their nation, our military cannot operate on that basis. We are better off leaving if we can't agree on a waiver of immunity. --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 17:29, 14 July 2008 (EDT)