Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 76

Thread: Chapo Guzman son arrested, then freed...

  1. #21
    Modding this sack of shit BehindBlueI's's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Midwest
    Quote Originally Posted by TGS View Post
    Sure, I get that. I don't find it morally reprehensible for a government to do kill missions on narco-terrorists, though. I don't think it was wrong to summarily execute Bin Laden, nor would I personally feel a wrong was committed if they killed this dude or other leadership in the cartels instead of taking them prisoner only having just assured their certain death unless they release the prisoner. Were the cops in Dallas wrong to blow up a criminal instead of assuredly wasting their lives to apprehend him? Obviously not. There's no difference in the Grand scheme here....if those cops were to try and maintain custody of that prisoner it would have been guaranteed death, so they opted to simply kill him instead (as is articulable under the US Constitution).

    I also think we are afforded many luxuries in our LE system in the USA that are not relevant to some other countries. In the end, the government's interest in maintaining law and order outweighs that person's interests.

    FWIW, we also have provisions in the US Constitution to allow the summary execution of prisoners. There's a time and place for it, and applying the standards of domestic policing in the USA to a place like Mexico is irrational, IMO.
    Maybe you know something I don't, but the official account of Bin Laden was an attempt at capture that ended in his death when he failed to comply, not a summary execution.

    Dallas? You know better than that. An uncontrolled suspect at large isn't a prisoner. There's a huge difference "in the grand scheme of things" of killing soldiers on the battlefield who are actively fighting vs murdering prisoners of war and the equivalent in law enforcement.
    Sorta around sometimes for some of your shitty mod needs.

  2. #22
    Member TGS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Back in northern Virginia
    Quote Originally Posted by BehindBlueI's View Post
    Maybe you know something I don't, but the official account of Bin Laden was an attempt at capture that ended in his death when he failed to comply, not a summary execution.

    Dallas? You know better than that. An uncontrolled suspect at large isn't a prisoner. There's a huge difference "in the grand scheme of things" of killing soldiers on the battlefield who are actively fighting vs murdering prisoners of war and the equivalent in law enforcement.
    I do "know better than that".

    I also have critical thinking abilities, and can figure out that some fucking cop in a civilized city in the USA arresting someone is a far cry from a small group of cops apprehending a narco-terrorist in a country with essentially no safe space to go to, where they are guaranteed death if they maintain custody of that prisoner because of a complete breakdown of the normal civil process that you have the luxury of. In the Grand scheme of life vs death, moralities, and the necessity of the state to maintain law and order, it's no different than ordering a group of cops through a fatal funnel where they are guaranteed to die.

    Don't get all soap boxey and condescending with me.

    ETA: if Bin Laden isn't a good enough example for you, how about drone strikes on AmCits overseas? They're morally acceptable given the imminency of stopping that person, and the fact that if we sent in a team we couldn't have any reasonable assurance that the terrorist is going to be safeguarded. So we kill them instead.

    Little difference from a team of cops apprehending a narco-terrorist where they can't safeguard the prisoner to be subjected to the usual civil processes, and they present an immenent threat to the law and order of the state.

    Let's not forget that the lines between LE and military are very distinctly an American thing, and in many countries (including Mexico, where the military performs police functions) are blurred to irrelevant. So you can't approach these issues with the same lens you would looking at cops in the US.
    Last edited by TGS; 10-19-2019 at 11:45 AM.
    "Are you ready? Okay. Let's roll."- Last words of Todd Beamer

  3. #23
    banana republican blues's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Blue Ridge Mtns
    Jeez, do I have to send both of you to your rooms? You both make good points.

    (I only wish I had James Bond's "license to kill" when I was still working. I can think of a few I'd have preferred didn't come along willingly.)
    There's nothing civil about this war.

    Read: Harrison Bergeron

  4. #24
    Modding this sack of shit BehindBlueI's's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Midwest
    Quote Originally Posted by TGS View Post
    I do "know better than that".

    I also have critical thinking abilities, and can figure out that some fucking cop in a civilized city in the USA arresting someone is a far cry from a small group of cops apprehending a narco-terrorist in a country with essentially no safe space to go to, where they are guaranteed death if they maintain custody of that prisoner because of a complete breakdown of the normal civil process that you have the luxury of. In the Grand scheme of life vs death, moralities, and the necessity of the state to maintain law and order, it's no different than ordering a group of cops through a fatal funnel where they are guaranteed to die.

    Don't get all soap boxey and condescending with me.
    Then don't equate an uncontrolled suspect at large with a prisoner. The actual people in the actual event let the suspect go and didn't summarily execute him. I guess even those 3rd world shit hole cops decided it wasn't the same morally. Or maybe they were just scared of the repercussions if they did kill him. The conversation about summary execution came from a presumed 1st worlder posting on this thread.
    Sorta around sometimes for some of your shitty mod needs.

  5. #25
    Member TGS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Back in northern Virginia
    Quote Originally Posted by BehindBlueI's View Post
    Then don't equate an uncontrolled suspect at large with a prisoner. The actual people in the actual event let the suspect go and didn't summarily execute him. I guess even those 3rd world shit hole cops decided it wasn't the same morally. Or maybe they were just scared of the repercussions if they did kill him. The conversation about summary execution came from a presumed 1st worlder posting on this thread.
    They let him go because they weren't in a situation to "bring the pain" or however HCM put it.

    If you think they let him go because of their sensitivities, I've got nice oceanfront property in Arizona to sell you. Kill missions and summary executions on behalf of the Mexican Govt against Narco-Terrorists happen, it's not out of the norm.
    Last edited by TGS; 10-19-2019 at 11:50 AM.
    "Are you ready? Okay. Let's roll."- Last words of Todd Beamer

  6. #26
    Modding this sack of shit BehindBlueI's's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Midwest
    Quote Originally Posted by TGS View Post
    They let him go because they weren't in a situation to "bring the pain" or however HCM put it.

    If you think they let him go because of their sensitivities, I've got nice oceanfront property in Arizona to sell you. Kill missions and summary executions on behalf of the Mexican Govt against Narco-Terrorists happen, it's not out of the norm.
    I liked AZ, but figure it's probably too hot in the summer for me, even with the ocean's gentle breeze. Maybe a nice toll bridge instead?

    I'm sure the Mexican gov't does all sorts of things I wouldn't find acceptable. I'm sure our gov't does things I wouldn't find acceptable. I just find our way of life the least shitty, but I don't have to base my moral compass on either. Summary execution of a controlled prisoner is morally wrong and is not the same as what happened in Dallas, etc. You said "you do know better than that" so I'm legitimately confused as to why you keep equating the two. Are you arguing that it does, in fact, happen? Sure. Are you arguing that my moral compass is wrong for not agreeing with it? Then you're wasting your time. I am not a peacenik and have the proven capability to kill if required. However executing prisoners is outside what I find morally allowable regardless of who or why others engage in it.
    Sorta around sometimes for some of your shitty mod needs.

  7. #27
    banana republican blues's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Blue Ridge Mtns
    Quote Originally Posted by BehindBlueI's View Post
    However executing prisoners is outside what I find morally allowable regardless of who or why others engage in it.
    Agreed. I've even gotten into it with one of my guys during an op when he struck a guy I had placed in handcuffs.

    Nope. Not acceptable.
    There's nothing civil about this war.

    Read: Harrison Bergeron

  8. #28
    Deadeye Dick Clusterfrack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Wokelandia
    I agree for a different reason. I have no problem with covert ops to schwack foreign terrorists, but they needed to take him alive and show that the Mex govt has the strength to try and convict him lawfully. Of course they don’t because the government doesn’t run the country. Which is again, why I don’t go there.
    "You can never have too many knives." --Joe Ambercrombie
    Shabbat shalom, motherf***ers! --Mordechai Jefferson Carver

  9. #29
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    TEXAS !
    Quote Originally Posted by TGS View Post
    Sure, I get that. I don't find it morally reprehensible for a government to do kill missions on narco-terrorists, though. I don't think it was wrong to summarily execute Bin Laden, nor would I personally feel a wrong was committed if they killed this dude or other leadership in the cartels instead of taking them prisoner only having just assured their certain death unless they release the prisoner. Were the cops in Dallas wrong to blow up a criminal instead of assuredly wasting their lives to apprehend him? Obviously not. There's no difference in the Grand scheme here....if those cops were to try and maintain custody of that prisoner it would have been guaranteed death, so they opted to simply kill him instead (as is articulable under the US Constitution).

    I also think we are afforded many luxuries in our LE system in the USA that are not relevant to some other countries. In the end, the government's interest in maintaining law and order outweighs that person's interests.

    FWIW, we also have provisions in the US Constitution to allow the summary execution of prisoners. There's a time and place for it, and applying the standards of domestic policing in the USA to a place like Mexico is irrational, IMO.
    There is nothing wrong with US policing standards but they require a certain level of stability and security to function.

    This is why even in the United States, certain things done differently in the past.

    For example, back in the day, shooting fleeing felons was a practical necessity. As society became more stable and technology advanced In the form of things like flashlights, police radios, police aircraft, etc the necessity of preventing escape from visual range diminished.

    Given the resources available today Tennessee vs Garner makes sense. Given the resources available 100 years ago it would be ridiculous.

    The security situation in Mexico has devolved from a criminal problem to a Narco-Terrorist insurgency.

  10. #30
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    TEXAS !
    Quote Originally Posted by Clusterfrack View Post
    I agree for a different reason. I have no problem with covert ops to schwack foreign terrorists, but they needed to take him alive and show that the Mex govt has the strength to try and convict him lawfully. Of course they don’t because the government doesn’t run the country. Which is again, why I don’t go there.
    The real problem is the Mexican Government could capture him but keeping him long term after conviction is problematic. This is the same issue Colombia faced and solved largely by a combination of killing and outsourcing long term incarceration to the U.S. via extradition.

    Mexico also has some unique conditions. Mexico is not really a 3rd world country. It is a country with first world GDP that keeps the majority of its population in thirds world conditions. That creates its own set of problems.
    Last edited by HCM; 10-19-2019 at 12:24 PM.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •