Well that's because using unguided munitions and accidentally killing civilians is a war-crime under the Geneva conventions if you have munitions available that might have prevented those casualties. The US is a signatory of the Geneva Convention and therefore bound to follow it.
The Geneva Convention also explicitly forbids treating the civilian population as "enemy resources", they are civilians and every possible care should be taken not to injure them even to the point that when you're acting in high civilian density areas you're explicitly forbidden from initiating a firefight, you are permitted to return fire but not initiate it.
I do however agree that while the US military may be a lot of unasvory things they are not Nazis and we should try not to overuse the word.
But the US military are explicitly war-criminals on dozens of occasions and those responsible ought to be brought before the war-crimes tribunal at Hague. But since the US has threatened that if that ever happens they will invade the Netherlands and free any accused service members by armed force, and as such it is unlikely that will happen.
It is unfortunately blatantly obvious that the UCMJ of the US armed forces is woefully insufficient since both the pilot and the AWACS operator of the Apache attack in Iraq went unpunished.
Yes I understood your meaning but my general opinion is that the main punishment to corrupt/stupid/greedy managers should come mainly from the government(if I understood your post correctly you mean that the punishment should mostly come from the company suing for losses), not the company seeking to reclaim their losses.
This because the company often wishes to just get these embarrassing things away from the public and thus often lets them off easily or doesn't go after them at all, and because the companies often earn money from these corrupt dealings they have no interest in stopping them until they get caught. And a civilian court cannot mete out jail sentences, criminal courts can and I do think these corrupt/greedy managers deserve long jail sentences.
No the government should be doing that, the behavior should be criminal with a long jail sentence and at least 100% fines on the estimated profits as a consequence.
If the company/shareholders want to pile a civil suit on top of that of course but I definitely think the government should punish their behavior.
If these companies earned billions in illicit profits and the people who they cheated decides to sue them all at once then yes it's quite likely but that is not a reason to not punish them. Maybe whoever replaces them will think twice about doing following in their shoes.
Personally though I don't think that will stop this sort of behavior unless you also start sentencing the CEO's, boards and other senior leadership who was running these companies at the time to long prison sentences and high fines(and preferably figure out in what bank paradises they have their cash hidden so that you can take it back )
Yers but there were a lot fewer humans in those hotter times, there was plenty of land to spread out over, what will happen when dryspells cause starvation and famine? War will happen and as soon as a nuclear capable nation will be involved things will go from bad to hell in 0 seconds flat.
if it's just a few degrees even humanity in it's current shape could easily survive.
What will kill us isn't the rise in temperatures, it's most likely the wars over increasingly limited resources such as arable land, toss in a bunch of nukes and those acres won't be arable/hospitable for long.
No pulling out is not always a loss. But you do have an obligation to the people living in the countries that you invaded to at least try to leave them with a working country(this is written into the Geneva convention to which the United States is a signatory and hence bound to follow).
If the US just invaded and then hightailed it out of there I think the US would deserve the same sanctions and import/export restrictions that is currently being leveraged against Iran and more.
The Twin Towers is the result of a longstanding US foreign policy to topple foreign governments and use the CIA or military forces to meddle in other countries business where you have no legitimate reason to meddle.
I do not condone the actions of Hamas but lets face it, Israel doesn't really give anyone due process either before their drone, helicopter or air strikes.
If you wanna look at the death tolls Israel causes something on the scale of >10 times more deaths and injuries(and yes those numbers matter A LOT more than the number of weapons fired). Plus Israel is an invader, they are the aggressor, and are occupying land that legitimately belongs to the Palestinians, they have the right to resist occupation with the means they have at hand, Israel as an invader has no credible claim of self defense until they withdraw to the borders outlined in the 1947 UN partition plan.
Yeah it's not like Israel is also knowingly breaking the Geneva Convention...
The settlements in the West Bank is a blatant violation of the Geneva Convention, such actions are explicitly forbidden.
Using White Phosphorus is also explicitly forbidden, which Israel has been seen using in the 2008 conflict.
Collective Punishment is also explicitly forbidden, such as for example bulldozing the houses of know suicide bombers as a revenge for their actions. Any and all bombings that are preceded by leaflet notices that bombings take place also is nothing but collective punishment because any military importance will be long gone by the time the bombs arrive, the only outcome will be the pointless destruction of the homes of innocent civilians.
It is also explicitly forbidden to use indiscriminate weapons such as missiles, rockets and bombs in densely populated civilian areas(both Hamas and Israel is guilty of this but Israel does it on a scale 10 times larger than anything Hamas can even hope to accomplish)
I'd say that the greater sin definitely lies on Israel because as a democracy and a working nation they have a greater responsibility, they actually signed and ratified the Geneva convention, also Israel is occupying legitimate Palestinian territory, therefore the armed resistance of Hamas is both righteous and warranted, I might not agree with their methods but the means they have available are limited. Israel is the aggressor, they are an invader, and as long as they are occupying territory they have no reasonable claim of ever acting in self defense.
Yeah none of the Arab nations signed that because they weren't asked too, it was not them getting land, the Palestinians already there protested because understandably they'd be upset about loosing land that was at the time mostly theirs. Other Arab states invaded Israel yes, but those were other sovereign staes not the Palestinians doing the invading.
Yes Fatah and Hamas has the total annihilation of Israel on their charter, that will never change, but if the Palestinians stop being occupied, terrorized and murdered then the support for those movements will decrease and eventually cease to have any meaningful power.
The Israelis did start this aggression against the Palestinians, the Palestinians were not the perpetrators of the 1948 war or the 1967 one, those were the actions of other sovereign nation.
Israel "started this" when they occupied territory the legitimately belong to the Palestinians. The Palestinians have a legitimate right recognized in international law to oppose any occupation by military or other means, Israel is explicitly acting against international law when they are occupying Palestinian territory and building settlements on Palestinian land.
Israel IS the aggressor, Israel IS occupying Palestinian land, Israel IS regularly committing war crimes as defined by the Geneva Convention on at the very least the same scale as Hamas etc are.
Any responsibility for the situation that has arisen is 99.98% on Israel and it is their responsibility to resolve it peacefully, as long as Israel is occupying land outside the borers declared in the 1947 UN partition plan the the Palestinian people has a RIGHT to fight their oppressors.
No Israel cannot keep going longer than they can. Israel can keep going exactly as long as the western nations and the US keep holding them up, once public opinion and outrage swings enough against(and as atrocities and war crimes keep piling up and the news keep reporting the plight of the Palestinian people the public opinion will start swinging, Israel right now is living on the collective guilt of the western nations for what happened in WWII, but that fuel will eventually run out) them then Israel will be on their own and they will be hopelessly outnumbered, at first they might win a temporary respite because if their technological advantage but eventually they will run out of high tech bombs and missiles and then the tide will turn, and eventually they will run out of fuel for their machines of war and then things will be in free fall and then Israel will be lost to the collective hatred Israel has carefully nurtured in the Palestinian people and we will have another Holocaust.
I most certainly don't want this to happen because I think that Israel and the Jewish people has the same right to exist as any other nation or people but the Palestinian people has the exact same right to live and form a nation in the territory they were granted by the 1947 UN partition plan.
Yes but that was WWII, afterwards the victorious nations sat down and wrote something called the Geneva Conventions to try and prevent something like WWII from ever happening again and also to try and protect the civilian population from the horrors of war as much as possible, most of the nations of the world have signed and ratified this convention.
Yes the United States have committed multiple war crimes in both the Afghanistan war and the Iraq war and they know it. The US have even gone so far as to threaten that if the international war crimes tribunal at Hague ever try to start proceedings against a US citizen then they will attack the Netherlands and free that person through military force if necessary.
By your choice of words I presume you are Israeli, well then.
Your country is occupying land that rightly belong to the Palestinians. As long as the occupation continues the Palestinians has a right to fight that occupation with the means at their disposal. Israel has signed and ratified the1947 UN partition plan, thus they have accepted those borders, anything outside them is occupying land that belongs to the Palestinians.
As long as you are occupying that territory the Palestinians have legitimate right to fight your occupation by the military means at their hands, the only thing they have access to is WWII era rocket tech, you can basically just point it in the general direction and hope it hits something, you can start complaining about the rockets against civilian population centers when you stop occupying Palestinian lands and stop perpetrating war crimes of your own. For example the leaflet drops followed later by bombs is nothing more than collective punishment because any military target will evacuate right along with the civilians you claim to want to protect, so the only thing destroyed is peoples homes, collective punishment is explicitly forbidden by the Geneva Convention, what Israel is doing is terrorism on a national scale, they don't call it terrorism because that sounds bad, they call it self defense which it is not, but it sounds better. As long as you are an attacker, an occupying force, you have no legitimate claims of self defense as long as the occupation continues because what you're claiming "self defense" against is the Palestinians legitimate right to fight oppression and,occupation, this right is recognized by international law which is more than one can say about your supposed self defense.
Besides, even if it at some point was self defense the proportionality is so ridiculously exceeded that only the mentally insane can call it self defense. When you kill 10 or even 100 for every one of you they kill or injure then your actions have ceased to be self defense long ago, it is terrorism, genocide and murder, nothing else.
It's far more likely that they noticed that "hey people still bought gas for the higher price so if they're still willing to buy why would we ever lower it"
Many countries however have have civilized laws where the company does not automatically own your work unless it was created in the normal performance of your job or on behalf of the company.
The system where the default assumption that everything you create belongs to the employer amounts to intellectual slavery and ought to be abolished wherever it exists.
In theory you are right but in reality the problem is more complex.
You have a system which is incredibly biased towards a two party system, minor parties have almost no chance of getting a significant number of seats in either the senate or congress.
So even if you would ideally want to vote for something completely different voting on a minor party is pretty much the same thing as voting for the guy you least want to have the office. You can of course choose not to vote but that's simply saying that you accept the result regardless of who the winner is. if you decide not to vote you accepting the result whatever it is even if the winner is someone hell bent on changing the country into a dictatorship and conquer the rest of the world.
The system is flawed and the voters don't have much actual choice except the 2 persons the system decides to let them choose between and then you pick whoever you least want to have in office and vote for his opponent.
Other licensees typically write cross-license agreements where they offer some of their own patents in return and therefore gets a sometimes much lower rate. Apple wants the lower rates without offering any other patents in return.
From what I read the problem is that the typical negotiations on FRAND patents is that I want to license patent X and in return u get to license patent Y plus $Z(or the other way around). This is of course fine but then Apple comes along and wants to license some FRAND patents but refuse to include any of their own patents in the deal but they still expect to pay only $Z. Samsung tells Apple no way thats completely unreasonable, either you agree to license us some of your patents or you pay a lot more than $Z... Apple does not like that and instead decides to whine to the Department of Justice and the ITC.
it's not illegal but it does typically require government permission, see the Motorola takeover for example, Google was required to give certain promises to be allowed to buy Motorola
Sure they can, they can issue whatever orders they want to Google but if Google is convinced that the EU lack jurisdiction someplace they can choose to ignore those orders. BUT since Google currently funnels most of it's global profits through Ireland because of the low corporate tax there life could become VERY difficult for Google if the EU decides to order that those funds be frozen which it can do since Ireland is within it's jurisdiction, it's the same as when the US govt sizes.com address from people/businesses with no presence in the US.
Well the EU might not in the end be able to restrict how Google use the data but they can make it very painful for Google to refuse compliance with the law, they can seize any and all Google property inside the EU(including the funds Google funnels through Ireland because the low corporate tax which is most of Google's global profits...), they can order funds frozen internationally and anyone other than the US who cares to have EU as a trading partner will probably comply, they can harass any Google executives who travels to/inside the EU, they can forbid any EU company or companies that does business in EU from doing business with Google.
If Google wants to do business inside the EU they had better comply with EU laws and right now EU law says YOU own your data and while that might not exactly be true in reality because you have no control of the data once it leaves your hands it means that you or the EU on behalf of it's citizens can make life very difficult for Google or anyone else for that matter if they break those laws.
Slashdot Mirror
The Nazis were much much more than extreme Nationalists.
Well that's because using unguided munitions and accidentally killing civilians is a war-crime under the Geneva conventions if you have munitions available that might have prevented those casualties. The US is a signatory of the Geneva Convention and therefore bound to follow it.
The Geneva Convention also explicitly forbids treating the civilian population as "enemy resources", they are civilians and every possible care should be taken not to injure them even to the point that when you're acting in high civilian density areas you're explicitly forbidden from initiating a firefight, you are permitted to return fire but not initiate it.
I do however agree that while the US military may be a lot of unasvory things they are not Nazis and we should try not to overuse the word.
But the US military are explicitly war-criminals on dozens of occasions and those responsible ought to be brought before the war-crimes tribunal at Hague. But since the US has threatened that if that ever happens they will invade the Netherlands and free any accused service members by armed force, and as such it is unlikely that will happen.
It is unfortunately blatantly obvious that the UCMJ of the US armed forces is woefully insufficient since both the pilot and the AWACS operator of the Apache attack in Iraq went unpunished.
Yes I understood your meaning but my general opinion is that the main punishment to corrupt/stupid/greedy managers should come mainly from the government(if I understood your post correctly you mean that the punishment should mostly come from the company suing for losses), not the company seeking to reclaim their losses.
This because the company often wishes to just get these embarrassing things away from the public and thus often lets them off easily or doesn't go after them at all, and because the companies often earn money from these corrupt dealings they have no interest in stopping them until they get caught. And a civilian court cannot mete out jail sentences, criminal courts can and I do think these corrupt/greedy managers deserve long jail sentences.
No the government should be doing that, the behavior should be criminal with a long jail sentence and at least 100% fines on the estimated profits as a consequence. If the company/shareholders want to pile a civil suit on top of that of course but I definitely think the government should punish their behavior.
If these companies earned billions in illicit profits and the people who they cheated decides to sue them all at once then yes it's quite likely but that is not a reason to not punish them. Maybe whoever replaces them will think twice about doing following in their shoes.
Personally though I don't think that will stop this sort of behavior unless you also start sentencing the CEO's, boards and other senior leadership who was running these companies at the time to long prison sentences and high fines(and preferably figure out in what bank paradises they have their cash hidden so that you can take it back )
Yers but there were a lot fewer humans in those hotter times, there was plenty of land to spread out over, what will happen when dryspells cause starvation and famine? War will happen and as soon as a nuclear capable nation will be involved things will go from bad to hell in 0 seconds flat.
if it's just a few degrees even humanity in it's current shape could easily survive.
What will kill us isn't the rise in temperatures, it's most likely the wars over increasingly limited resources such as arable land, toss in a bunch of nukes and those acres won't be arable/hospitable for long.
No pulling out is not always a loss. But you do have an obligation to the people living in the countries that you invaded to at least try to leave them with a working country(this is written into the Geneva convention to which the United States is a signatory and hence bound to follow).
If the US just invaded and then hightailed it out of there I think the US would deserve the same sanctions and import/export restrictions that is currently being leveraged against Iran and more.
The Twin Towers is the result of a longstanding US foreign policy to topple foreign governments and use the CIA or military forces to meddle in other countries business where you have no legitimate reason to meddle.
I do not condone the actions of Hamas but lets face it, Israel doesn't really give anyone due process either before their drone, helicopter or air strikes. If you wanna look at the death tolls Israel causes something on the scale of >10 times more deaths and injuries(and yes those numbers matter A LOT more than the number of weapons fired). Plus Israel is an invader, they are the aggressor, and are occupying land that legitimately belongs to the Palestinians, they have the right to resist occupation with the means they have at hand, Israel as an invader has no credible claim of self defense until they withdraw to the borders outlined in the 1947 UN partition plan.
Yeah it's not like Israel is also knowingly breaking the Geneva Convention...
The settlements in the West Bank is a blatant violation of the Geneva Convention, such actions are explicitly forbidden.
Using White Phosphorus is also explicitly forbidden, which Israel has been seen using in the 2008 conflict.
Collective Punishment is also explicitly forbidden, such as for example bulldozing the houses of know suicide bombers as a revenge for their actions. Any and all bombings that are preceded by leaflet notices that bombings take place also is nothing but collective punishment because any military importance will be long gone by the time the bombs arrive, the only outcome will be the pointless destruction of the homes of innocent civilians.
It is also explicitly forbidden to use indiscriminate weapons such as missiles, rockets and bombs in densely populated civilian areas(both Hamas and Israel is guilty of this but Israel does it on a scale 10 times larger than anything Hamas can even hope to accomplish)
I'd say that the greater sin definitely lies on Israel because as a democracy and a working nation they have a greater responsibility, they actually signed and ratified the Geneva convention, also Israel is occupying legitimate Palestinian territory, therefore the armed resistance of Hamas is both righteous and warranted, I might not agree with their methods but the means they have available are limited. Israel is the aggressor, they are an invader, and as long as they are occupying territory they have no reasonable claim of ever acting in self defense.
Yes and there were a lot of jewish militant organizations doing a lot of nasty things back then, murdering foreign diplomats and what not.
Yeah none of the Arab nations signed that because they weren't asked too, it was not them getting land, the Palestinians already there protested because understandably they'd be upset about loosing land that was at the time mostly theirs. Other Arab states invaded Israel yes, but those were other sovereign staes not the Palestinians doing the invading.
Yes Fatah and Hamas has the total annihilation of Israel on their charter, that will never change, but if the Palestinians stop being occupied, terrorized and murdered then the support for those movements will decrease and eventually cease to have any meaningful power.
The Israelis did start this aggression against the Palestinians, the Palestinians were not the perpetrators of the 1948 war or the 1967 one, those were the actions of other sovereign nation.
Israel "started this" when they occupied territory the legitimately belong to the Palestinians. The Palestinians have a legitimate right recognized in international law to oppose any occupation by military or other means, Israel is explicitly acting against international law when they are occupying Palestinian territory and building settlements on Palestinian land.
Israel IS the aggressor, Israel IS occupying Palestinian land, Israel IS regularly committing war crimes as defined by the Geneva Convention on at the very least the same scale as Hamas etc are.
Any responsibility for the situation that has arisen is 99.98% on Israel and it is their responsibility to resolve it peacefully, as long as Israel is occupying land outside the borers declared in the 1947 UN partition plan the the Palestinian people has a RIGHT to fight their oppressors.
No Israel cannot keep going longer than they can. Israel can keep going exactly as long as the western nations and the US keep holding them up, once public opinion and outrage swings enough against(and as atrocities and war crimes keep piling up and the news keep reporting the plight of the Palestinian people the public opinion will start swinging, Israel right now is living on the collective guilt of the western nations for what happened in WWII, but that fuel will eventually run out) them then Israel will be on their own and they will be hopelessly outnumbered, at first they might win a temporary respite because if their technological advantage but eventually they will run out of high tech bombs and missiles and then the tide will turn, and eventually they will run out of fuel for their machines of war and then things will be in free fall and then Israel will be lost to the collective hatred Israel has carefully nurtured in the Palestinian people and we will have another Holocaust.
I most certainly don't want this to happen because I think that Israel and the Jewish people has the same right to exist as any other nation or people but the Palestinian people has the exact same right to live and form a nation in the territory they were granted by the 1947 UN partition plan.
Yes but that was WWII, afterwards the victorious nations sat down and wrote something called the Geneva Conventions to try and prevent something like WWII from ever happening again and also to try and protect the civilian population from the horrors of war as much as possible, most of the nations of the world have signed and ratified this convention.
Yes the United States have committed multiple war crimes in both the Afghanistan war and the Iraq war and they know it. The US have even gone so far as to threaten that if the international war crimes tribunal at Hague ever try to start proceedings against a US citizen then they will attack the Netherlands and free that person through military force if necessary.
By your choice of words I presume you are Israeli, well then.
Your country is occupying land that rightly belong to the Palestinians. As long as the occupation continues the Palestinians has a right to fight that occupation with the means at their disposal. Israel has signed and ratified the1947 UN partition plan, thus they have accepted those borders, anything outside them is occupying land that belongs to the Palestinians.
As long as you are occupying that territory the Palestinians have legitimate right to fight your occupation by the military means at their hands, the only thing they have access to is WWII era rocket tech, you can basically just point it in the general direction and hope it hits something, you can start complaining about the rockets against civilian population centers when you stop occupying Palestinian lands and stop perpetrating war crimes of your own. For example the leaflet drops followed later by bombs is nothing more than collective punishment because any military target will evacuate right along with the civilians you claim to want to protect, so the only thing destroyed is peoples homes, collective punishment is explicitly forbidden by the Geneva Convention, what Israel is doing is terrorism on a national scale, they don't call it terrorism because that sounds bad, they call it self defense which it is not, but it sounds better. As long as you are an attacker, an occupying force, you have no legitimate claims of self defense as long as the occupation continues because what you're claiming "self defense" against is the Palestinians legitimate right to fight oppression and,occupation, this right is recognized by international law which is more than one can say about your supposed self defense.
Besides, even if it at some point was self defense the proportionality is so ridiculously exceeded that only the mentally insane can call it self defense. When you kill 10 or even 100 for every one of you they kill or injure then your actions have ceased to be self defense long ago, it is terrorism, genocide and murder, nothing else.
It's probably only 90% if you include the missiles they don't bother shooting at because they are going to land somewhere mostly harmless.
It's far more likely that they noticed that "hey people still bought gas for the higher price so if they're still willing to buy why would we ever lower it"
Many countries however have have civilized laws where the company does not automatically own your work unless it was created in the normal performance of your job or on behalf of the company.
The system where the default assumption that everything you create belongs to the employer amounts to intellectual slavery and ought to be abolished wherever it exists.
In theory you are right but in reality the problem is more complex. You have a system which is incredibly biased towards a two party system, minor parties have almost no chance of getting a significant number of seats in either the senate or congress.
So even if you would ideally want to vote for something completely different voting on a minor party is pretty much the same thing as voting for the guy you least want to have the office. You can of course choose not to vote but that's simply saying that you accept the result regardless of who the winner is. if you decide not to vote you accepting the result whatever it is even if the winner is someone hell bent on changing the country into a dictatorship and conquer the rest of the world.
The system is flawed and the voters don't have much actual choice except the 2 persons the system decides to let them choose between and then you pick whoever you least want to have in office and vote for his opponent.
Other licensees typically write cross-license agreements where they offer some of their own patents in return and therefore gets a sometimes much lower rate.
Apple wants the lower rates without offering any other patents in return.
From what I read the problem is that the typical negotiations on FRAND patents is that I want to license patent X and in return u get to license patent Y plus $Z(or the other way around). This is of course fine but then Apple comes along and wants to license some FRAND patents but refuse to include any of their own patents in the deal but they still expect to pay only $Z. Samsung tells Apple no way thats completely unreasonable, either you agree to license us some of your patents or you pay a lot more than $Z... Apple does not like that and instead decides to whine to the Department of Justice and the ITC.
it's not illegal but it does typically require government permission, see the Motorola takeover for example, Google was required to give certain promises to be allowed to buy Motorola
They probably/quite possibly will, no one has ever accused a bureaucracy if being fast or nimble.
Sure they can, they can issue whatever orders they want to Google but if Google is convinced that the EU lack jurisdiction someplace they can choose to ignore those orders. BUT since Google currently funnels most of it's global profits through Ireland because of the low corporate tax there life could become VERY difficult for Google if the EU decides to order that those funds be frozen which it can do since Ireland is within it's jurisdiction, it's the same as when the US govt sizes .com address from people/businesses with no presence in the US.
Well the EU might not in the end be able to restrict how Google use the data but they can make it very painful for Google to refuse compliance with the law, they can seize any and all Google property inside the EU(including the funds Google funnels through Ireland because the low corporate tax which is most of Google's global profits...), they can order funds frozen internationally and anyone other than the US who cares to have EU as a trading partner will probably comply, they can harass any Google executives who travels to/inside the EU, they can forbid any EU company or companies that does business in EU from doing business with Google.
If Google wants to do business inside the EU they had better comply with EU laws and right now EU law says YOU own your data and while that might not exactly be true in reality because you have no control of the data once it leaves your hands it means that you or the EU on behalf of it's citizens can make life very difficult for Google or anyone else for that matter if they break those laws.