Slashdot Mirror
President Obama Commutes Chelsea Manning's Sentence (theverge.com)
The New York Times is reporting that President Obama has commuted Chelsea Manning's sentence. What this translates to is a reduced sentence for Manning, from 35 years to just over seven years. Since Manning has already served a majority of those years, she is due to be released from federal custody on May 17th. The Verge reports: While serving as an intelligence analyst in Iraq, Manning leaked more than 700,000 documents to Wikileaks, including video of a 2007 airstrike in Baghdad that killed two Reuters employees. In 2013, Manning was sentenced to 35 years in prison for her role in the leak and has been held at the U.S. Disciplinary Barracks at Fort Leavenworth for the past three years. Julian Assange, who has long been sought by U.S. and EU authorities for extradition on Swedish rape charges, had previously pledged to surrender himself to U.S. authorities if Manning was pardoned. Born Bradley Manning, Chelsea announced her gender transition the day after the verdict was handed down. "I am Chelsea Manning. I am a female," she said in a statement. "Given the way that I feel, and have felt since childhood, I want to begin hormone therapy as soon as possible." Obtaining the resulting medical treatments was extremely difficult for Manning, and was the subject of significant and sustained activism. After a lawsuit, Manning was approved for hormone therapy in 2015. In September 2016, she launched a hunger strike, demanding access to gender reassignment surgery; the military complied five days later.
I'm not sure how I feel about this. If it was my estimation that the two political parties were more interested in what is best for America, rather than just winning their ideological war, this would hold more weight for me.
Snowdon seems the logical "other pardon". Not sure I'd like that to happen. Would prefer a trial where he would be allowed to make his case. Manning wasn't afforded that opportunity either.
Neither case is at the instigation of a foreign government. So the issues need to be gone through in an open court so the country can understand the issues. And legally decide whether a crime was committed, or these were justified acts done by patriots.
Another consultant who stuck it out.
"We are the Priests, of the Temples of Syrinx..."
Sucks that she won't actually be released until may. She's going to go through absolute hell in there between now and then.
So then, any response from Wikileaks / Assange? Will he now give himself up, as per this tweet - https://twitter.com/wikileaks/... ? (Note - not a troll response, genuinely interested to hear what folks think happens on that front now... )
Prison does strange things to you. Go in a man, come out a woman.
Thank you Obama!!
Manning did the world a great service... I cant say more than this was long overdue.
Next.. Snowden? Perhaps all the people in prison and jail except for murders and rapist after they have had an independent review to make sure that they were REALLY guilty/not guilty??
More....
Incoming trolls!
Dj fuQ [url="http://djfuq.org"]djfuq urges you to listen to the beats[/url] [url="http://djfuq.org"]http://djfuq.org[
Best fucking part...
"Earlier this month, WikiLeaks said it would agree to a US extradition request for the site's founder, Julian Assange, if Obama granted clemency to Manning. It was not immediately clear if WikiLeaks would make good on its promise."
I'm sure Julian will honor this....
Whistle blowing should not be considered treason. After seeing how other whistleblowers were treated, by the Obama administration, I can see why Snowden chose the actions he took. He was willing to give up his comfortable life to alert us all to a gigantic problem. One which has generated a huge amount of public debate. And has led to some actual reforms.
I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
For not being progressive, well, here you go. And thanks so much for staying home last November. Please, for God's sake show up for the mid terms.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
President Obama noted stark differences between Manning's and Snowden's cases.
From the New York Times article: “Chelsea Manning is somebody who went through the military criminal justice process, was exposed to due process, was found guilty, was sentenced for her crimes, and she acknowledged wrongdoing,” Pres. Obama said. “Mr. Snowden fled into the arms of an adversary, and has sought refuge in a country that most recently made a concerted effort to undermine confidence in our democracy.”
He also noted that while the documents Ms. Manning provided to WikiLeaks were “damaging to national security,” the ones Mr. Snowden disclosed were “far more serious and far more dangerous.” (None of the documents Ms. Manning disclosed were classified above the merely “secret” level.)
So, the president isn't about to pardon someone who hasn't even been tried for his crimes.
They were going to give Manning the gender reassignment surgery, now they don't have to.
Anyone taking bets on what Trump is going to tweet as a reaction to this? I'm sure something scathing and illogical, but likely entertaining.
-- Slashdot, making the Left look conservative since 1997.
Obama is a hard core neoliberal neocon freakshow. This is the guy that bombed more countries than Bush, make the Patriot Act look like the Magna Carta by repealing Habeas Corpus with an NDAA, and started a war in Libya without Congressional authorization. Which his own VP said he would have supported Bush's impeachment if he had done the same thing with Iran.
You mean after he tortured Manning for a year with solitary confinement, and committed unlawful command influence by declaring Manning guilty before a conviction - and promoted the judge during the trial. But now, after seven years in prison, with consistent humiliation (and a little torture mixed in) is he not merciful?
U.S. Senate seat for sale. Low, low price, too low to show here. Call for our best price.
Impeached, tried, found guilty. Meaningless formalities. A lot like Manning's trial I'd guess.
So yeah, keep telling yourself Blagojevich did nothing.
Snowden would be tried under the Espionage Act, like other whistleblowers persecuted by Obama, which doesn't allow defendants to claim their actions were justified. It would be an open-and shut case for the prosecution, in a closed trial, and then Snowden would be hit with an effective lifetime sentence after all the charges for all the documents were piled up. Then he could look forward to torture (the solitary confinement Manning was subjected to is torture) and routine humiliation (threaten more prison time for subversive materials that came through the prison).
Still, you might get a few years left where your prejudice may be voiced in polite company, as trans rights are 20-30 years behind gay rights in this country.
I'm always fascinated by the people who say that Snowden should have turned himself in.
Either you want people to expose corruption in government and whistleblow, or not.
If you want people to whistleblow, then ensuring that only saints who are willing to be martyrs can do so is ridiculous, as it practically guarantees that anyone spotting a crime who is not a martyr will not report it.
So which do you value more? A corrupt free government or rigidly enforcing unjust laws (or is someone actually going to try to claim that the espionage act which prohibits you from defending yourself of a potential capital offense is just)?
Typical depraved authoritarian groupthink. If you gave two shits about the lawwww, you would in fact demand that Manning and Snowden spend time in prison - behind every politician and official who were revealed to have broken the law by their leaks.
Take FISA just for starters. Up to five years in prison and a $10,000 fine for each offense. You guys demanding that Obama be sentenced to a few million years in prison and be fined a quadrillion dollars for tapping every phone call in the US without a warrant?
And then, "Sensitive" "Male", what about the boy fucking in Afghanistan? It was Wikileaks that revealed the contractors were engaged in child rape trafficking. You'll be happy to know that Hillary's State Department cleared itself of any wrong doing in the trafficking. But now it's just "old news", like Obama's drone strikes and repeal of habeas corpus, and soldiers are told to STFU and forget they saw anything.
But you DGAF about any of that, because you're a mindless authoritarian goon.
I'm having a hard time believing that what Manning did was whistleblowing. The entire thing was labeled as outright murder when it didn't seem to be the case unless you already came into it with a preconceived notion of that being the case. The people being killed in that video Manning leaked were obviously carrying weapons.
I guess the good thing that will come out of this is Assange is now forced to prove that he's not a total weasel. Of course, he'll probably backtrack and say that because it wasn't a full pardon that he doesn't have to honor his word because IMO Assange is a total weasel.
And to be honest, I think Snowden should be the one getting the pardon, not fucking Manning.
I agree that whistle blowing is not treason. However, I'm not sure if dumping 700,000 documents counts as whistle blowing. I know it might be difficult, but the individual (or group) doing this needs to be selective with released documents, only releasing those directly related to the wrongdoing that they are trying to expose. If they dump to much, and get someone killed (for something unrelated to the wrongdoing), I don't think they can get a pass for that.
What other facts are you guys going to object to? Yaknow your BFF even wanted to bring back whaling, when there isn't even a domestic whaling industry to pander to?
We need whistleblowers to protect us.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
Trump would never do that for a competitor.
You are welcome on my lawn.
The sentence was a bit harsh, and some of the methods used during interrogation and imprisonment, meant that a reduced sentence was reasonable.
Assange and Snowden need to make a deal now. Trump works for Russia, but he will hang them out to dry anyway, that's the kind of quisling he is.
Better the devil you know than the insane devil you don't know.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
First, I feel that Snowden should actually have his day in court and present his case before anything related to a pardon or commutation is discussed. The American people need to see and hear both his and the government's position and evidence in a more balanced, less sensational environment than the MSM gives us.
Second, I feel that neither Manning nor General Cartwright should have their sentences commuted. They were both members of the US military who had sworn oaths regarding their behavior and ethics in their service and disregarded them. Gen Cartwright, as an officer should be held to an even higher standard. They were both tried, found guilty and sentenced. What message does it send to the rest of the military if they don't have to serve their sentences? Why should anyone in the military feel compelled to obey any order or protect any secret if they know that whatever punishment they get will be commuted and all they need is some publicity to make it happen.
Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of congress. But then I repeat myself. -- Mark Twain
Assanage's offer was always empty, given that the US isn't after him, at least not publicly. Now he contends that the US wants to get him in secret, though he's presented no evidence of this and of course one would have to question if they'd agree to a public deal for something secret.
Assanage is wanted by Sweden and the UK. Sweden for a sexual assault case, and the UK for skipping bail in that case. The US has not filed any charges against him, though I'm quite sure they don't like him. If he left the embassy he would be arrested by the UK and shipped off to Sweden. Or they might not send him off, since he's broken UK law by skipping bail and try him there for that crime, then ship him off once she's served his sentence.
So this was always a stunt.
By that standard, we'd need to kill dozens of people based on Snowden's leaks and they were not even fired.
And given Mr. Trumps extreme antagonism for Russia in 2014 but extreme love for Russia by 2015, I suspect he'd end up in front of a firing squad as well.
I think they've got something unforgivable on him. Like video of the violent rape of a teen girl. Something that even a pardon won't really fix.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
I think Snowden should be the one getting the pardon, not fucking Manning.
I...I didn't think he was doing that.
That and show that the rape allegations were a farce to begin with, if he surrenders to the Brits and is handed over to the USG rather than Sweden.
So would Snowden, I imagine. But the laws Snowden would be charged under have no public interest exemption. Likewise, Whistleblower Protections only apply to actual Federal employees, not to contractors (or 'Office Supplies', as we used to call ourselves). So Snowden, in a U.S. court, will be explicitly prevented from 'making his case'. A jury would be forbidden from being allowed to consider it, meaning any such testimony could be blocked.
Maxim: People cannot follow directions.
Increases in truth directly with the length of time spent explaining them
AFTER Manning leaked it. Not by Manning.
Now try again and get it right this time. Blame Manning for what Manning did and not what others did instead.
True - North showed us what treason was with giving those anti-tank missiles to Hezbolla and selling a lot of stuff to Iran.
Whistleblowing - now that's pathetic in the treason stakes, not like in the old days when we had traitors that would hand over serious weapons, paid for by the taxpayer, to people that had killed over a hundred US Marines less than a year before and wanted to kill more Americans. They don't make traitors like they used to.
Do you think the same about David Petraeus? Same crime, worse motive.
repeat after me: Progressive. Meaning progress. That doesn't mean he solves every problem in the ever loving world. But he damn well solves some.
And yeah, I know I'm feeding the trolls, but I can't let this shit slide no more.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Allowing anything to be classified is a dangerous thing. It shields official behaviour from scrutiny.
It is like the encryption debate. There are two sides to the argument and both are absolutes.
If you can trust your government then you can allow it to classify things so that secrets can be kept from enemies.
If you can not trust your government it will hide its bad behaviour behind the classified label.
The person who reveals the former is a traitor.
The person who reveals the latter is a hero.
So, what is revealed has to be considered. If it reveals official egregious offences against the law then the revealing person is a hero and should be praised not censured.
So what we have to ask is wether there was egregious behaviour involved. If yes, a patriot, if no, a traitor.
TL;DR "You pays youse money and you takes youse choice"
You probably already realize that only the vast majority of people fall into the standard sexual/gender roles/identity. So while most people are born such that males have one Y chromosome and one X chromosome while females have two X chromosomes, that is the norm but there are plenty of exceptions. This is what, I think, gives the transgenders standing. As long as some people cannot be properly defined then nobody should be properly defined lest we make the wrong assumptions. I think that is a pure BS. Any sex alignment/change therapy is purely hormonal and seeks to align the patient/victim with traditional sex roles. Nobody is getting their chromosomes realigned! Doesn't this show that the two traditional sexual/gender role/identity is preferred even by those who wish to change for whatever reason?
If Snowden had picked thru the collection and released what supported his perspective ..ok.. fine. So we forget all the docs that did hilite some level of broken-ness.. how about we then try him on disclosure of the unrelated revelations that were damaging in a non-helpful way? Otherwise... lets re-write the rules that we hold our folks with Security clearance to allow for this.... (Yeah right!).. may an Ombudsman? Mr Snowden, enjoy your new home. I hope you are there a long time.
Time for a new Political party in the US (or two!) One is off the rails Other cant pony up a leader.
Whistle-blowing is a critical part of any free society, as sometimes things go wrong and some people or organizations begin the process of trying to make it a non-free society. Whistleblowers a one of the critical defense mechanisms against that. Now, classifying it as treason and dishing out harsh sentences means that freedom is already mostly removed or in the process of being removed. Only if you have no real freedom do whistleblowers become irrelevant. We are not quite there yet, but it is clear where the journey goes.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
You forget a couple of things here
1. The people being murdered in the videos were the bodyguards. In that part of the world, bodyguards carry weapons openly to discourage attackers. So you fail to actually understand the situation, despite it having been described numerous times.
2. Manning was not pardoned. His sentence was reduced to something that would have been much more appropriate in the first place.
3. Snowden has not been in prison at all and hence no revenge has been extracted and no deterrence to other patriots that see things going horribly wrong.
It is fascinating how insight-less some posters here can be.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Yes, the dems exposed the sausage making process which isn't pretty but at the same time it wasn't as bad as I expected it would be. Having actually read a bunch of the supposedly bad parts I found nothing that wasn't probably the norm in any parties. Politics is a dirty game and always will be... prostitution is a cleaner business.
What cost the Dems is the media coverage and a public not paying a lot of attention. The repeat of the same old nothing "news" was like Pavlov's dog at the wrong time-- the news did damage which was overcome but then it was RERUN again which did almost as much damage all over again. It wasn't legit news, just rumors illegally disclosed and then heavily propagandized ...which counts as "news" today. The media is so incompetent today one almost wonders if they are not doing it on purpose.... then you just have to remember a lot of them probably did as well in school as Sarah Palin (who has a journalism degree!)
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
Simultaneous with the selling of movie rights to raise cash to fund the lawsuits. He's going to long for the comfort of a cold cell in a while. I doubt they can teach him to keep his mouth shut either, so he will be losing the support of anyone who hears his other demented views. I wonder if he will continue with gender reassignment after the release? Could lose a lot of supporters if not.
Exactly, and this is why Snowden also fails to qualify for whistleblower protections. Had he kept his revelations to the NSA surveillance program, he would have been golden and fully worthy of Whistleblower status. But of course he didn't, he dumped a bunch more, compromising legitimate and legal collection efforts ongoing in and against foreign powers (friendly and hostile alike. In the spy game everybody spies on everybody). That ruined his claim to whistleblowing. And Manning never had any claim to such. Neither truly committed treason, just espionage.
I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
Manning leaked a lot more than one video. One of the others, for example show US soldiers murdering an Al Jazeera journalist and laughing about it. Other leaks by her revealed the torture happening in Abu Ghraib which put an end to that travesty.
Even if you think that "that" video has visible weapons (which somehow nobody else can see - and kind of disputed considering we know from other evidence they were ambulance workers) that doesn't mean there wasn't a public interest in the many other atrocities she revealed. Or are you denying those as well ? Was Abu Ghraib just harmless fun by horny girl soldiers who liked any excuse for showing their genitals to strangers ?
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
From Russia with love... to a federal prison in the US ? That's one helluva long distance relationship....
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
And Frankly, Reagan should have hanged next to North as it's an open secret North was acting on the orders of the great white hype.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
I highly doubt that the evil white man BRADLEY Manning would have gotten any mercy from The President. The only "rights" that Obama seems to care about are women's rights, black rights, gay rights, trans rights and whatever other "special persons" rights. White men be damned
Maybe Snowden should start identifying as a female to get his pardon?
Pervert transvestite leaks troop deployment and strength of American forces: FREE HIM! (Yes, him). Assange leaks stuff that hurts the Democrats: OFF WITH HIS HEAD!
Oh, I think it is and that he is currently already paying a price he should not have to pay. But those that think Snowden is a traitor think no revenge has been extracted yet. That was my point. Sorry if that was unclear.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
It is interesting that there seem to be no consideration for Citizen Four even though arguably what Manning did was worse and was done with less than noble reasons.
Maybe it is just that the big O has that much of a hard-on for Assange after WikiLeaks revealed how corrupt his good buddy Hillary and the DNC is
Manning did not just release information about wrong doing, where whistle blowing protections make sense, he released thousands of other documents. Documents that contained physical descriptions of informants. Those informants were targeted by the taliban and al qaeda. Just because manning is remorseful does not change the nature of his reckless behavior.
Knowledge = Power
P= W/t
t=Money
Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
I was surprised to hear about Manning. That said after reading the same content you posted, it starts to make a lot more sense. Considering Assange's role in the whole DNC and Russian hacking scandal this sounds a lot like a fsck you from Obama, the DNC, and the US government. Regardless of if Wikileaks honors what they said, it puts the ball firmly in their court (pardon pun), and also builds a stronger case against him, if only in the court of public appeal. In effect they have already had a win with a guilty Manning, keeping her in jail longer serves little purpose (not to mention her actions won her some public outcry), where offering clemency either nabs them a bigger fish in Assange, or more likely just gives him a public black eye. So yeah, I don't see this so much about Manning herself, but rather using her as a political pawn against Assange and his alleged recent actions with the Russians and "fixing" the US elections against the Democrats (or at least insomuch as the public story is concerned).
You ideologues are disgusting. A soldier committed a crime called treason during time of war. Usually such are HUNG or SHOT.
But y'all ideologues are happy as long as the crime hurts the USA.
No Wonder you all morons voted for Hilary, because you don't think the USA should have any secrets, just the rest of the fucking world should have secrets. FUCK YOU
Whoa whoa whoa.. back up a bit with the gender mud, I'm pretty sure Obama wants to be called he.
Doesn't matter. They'll just be calling us all "cucks" since we don't beat our wives or espouse genocide against people of color.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
And has led to some actual reforms.
Yes, now the contractors double up on a buddy system so they can watch each other to prevent future leaks about their continuing unconstitutional spying.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
Alternately, angels could descend from Heaven and testify that the rape allegations were false. I don't think my counterfactual is any less likely than yours.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Can presidential actions like this be undone by a future president? Or does something like double jeopardy apply? (Not that I want it to be undone, I'm just curious.)
Sorry to be anal, but Treason cannot be committed outside of a declared war.
Article 3 Section 3 of the Constitution. The writers were VERY careful to be extremely specific when defining it, since it had been used as a generic charge for anyone who displeased the king for so long.
Even the Rosenbergs were executed for 'Conspiracy to commit espionage' .
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts."
Alternatively, you could not be willfully obtuse. Assange detractors have spent years saying the U.S. hasn't even asked the U.K. to extradite him (some just in this Slashdot story). That it really is about rape allegations, and Assange really should stop cowering in an embassy and face the charges.
If Assange walks out of the embassy and surrenders to the British police, and they immediately hand him over to the United States and not Sweden, it shows the allegations were a mere pretext all along.
1 + 1 = 2.
It's been in the press a few times as you should be aware unless you've been living under a rock. Google or asking someone who has been paying attention to this issue will help. Expensive people in Washington have burned through many hours of meetings about Assange, perhaps entirely pointlessly, but it's still you taxes at work.
Right. If he leaves the Ecuadorian embassy and the UK authorities ship him to the US, or if Sweden sends him to the US, or if angels descend from on high and testify for him, I'll believe this isn't just a rape case. All three are hypothetical, and they all look to me like less than 1% probability.
I believe that, if Assange walks out of the embassy, the UK police will arrest him and that he will then face criminal charges from both the UK and Sweden. I don't know how the Swedish trial will go, but he's definitely a criminal in the UK. I don't think the US will be involved at all. I haven't seen any good evidence to think otherwise.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Manning leaked a lot more than one video. One of the others, for example show US soldiers murdering an Al Jazeera journalist and laughing about it. Other leaks by her revealed the torture happening in Abu Ghraib which put an end to that travesty.
I have to ask; what kind of crack are you on?
The reason I ask is because Abu Ghraib was exposed in 2004, and Manning didn't even enlist until 3 years afterwards. Furthermore, you're going to have to be specific about the soldiers supposedly laughing as they murder somebody because I'm looking at a list of Manning's leaks and nothing like this is mentioned among them.
Even if you think that "that" video has visible weapons (which somehow nobody else can see - and kind of disputed considering we know from other evidence they were ambulance workers) that doesn't mean there wasn't a public interest in the many other atrocities she revealed. Or are you denying those as well ? Was Abu Ghraib just harmless fun by horny girl soldiers who liked any excuse for showing their genitals to strangers ?
It's documented that they were in fact carrying weapons. Furthermore, Assange himself even admitted to editing the video in order to manipulate the public:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/tec...
What Assange is up to is more prosaic. He hit the big time with his video entitled "Collateral Murder" that used footage, shot from a US helicopter, of the killing of alleged insurgents and two Iraqi employees of Reuters, to accuse the American military of a war crime.
Oddly enough, it was Stephen Colbert, ostensibly a comedian, who skewered him. "There are armed men in the group. They did find a rocket-propelled grenade among the group. The Reuters photographers who were regrettably killed were not identified as photographers.
"And you have edited this tape, and you have given it a title called 'Collateral Murder'. That's not leaking. That's a pure editorial." Assange admitted that he was seeking to manipulate and create "maximum political impact".
In other words, you're full of shit.
>It's documented that they were in fact carrying weapons. Furthermore, Assange himself even admitted to editing the video in order to manipulate the public:
Oh right... so the right to bear arms only applies to Americans ? Oh sorry, i forgot, WHITE Americans. Anybody else has a gun - their fair game to kill.
>There are armed men in the group
Yes, they are called bodyguards. The mere presence of a weapon does not make somebody an enemy combatant. The Geneva convention is supposed to mean you ONLY shoot at other soldiers.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
Oh right... so the right to bear arms only applies to Americans ? Oh sorry, i forgot, WHITE Americans. Anybody else has a gun - their fair game to kill. ...
Yes, they are called bodyguards. The mere presence of a weapon does not make somebody an enemy combatant. The Geneva convention is supposed to mean you ONLY shoot at other soldiers.
Again, that's the crack talking.
Geneva Convention is quite specific that enemy soldiers are supposed to bear a uniform or other insignia to indicate that they are a legitimate target, among other things. Since the opposition forces there didn't follow any Geneva rules, then Geneva just flat out didn't apply as per its own rules. However generally accepted rules of engagement against enemy combatants certainly applied in this case -- they were in an area that was only hours ago inhabited by people who were firing upon US soldiers, and they were carrying weapons. That was all that was required to justify lethal force by any existing legal standard. There is no requirement for them to open fire.
And in fact, neither Al-Qaeda, ISIS/ISIL/Daesh, nor any other terrorist group meet any internationally accepted legal definition of being soldiers.
That said, you haven't made a single correct statement yet. Just stop already, you're fucking stupid.