[andyt]

Brenda Brenda:

andyt andyt:

$1:

An argument could be made that the wounded Taliban was suffering and Semrau was only putting him out of his misery.

Drapeau said Canadian and international humanitarian law does not recognize mercy killings and it's unlikely such a defence would stand.

Well, mercy killing should be recognized, in civilian life too. And I think international law does recognized euthanasia in say Holland, Switzerland, etc. This seems to be a similar case. They guy was dying anyway and no treatment would help. So Semrau put him out of his misery. A decent act.

Except that many of the people who defend Semrau would probably howl like dogs if the Talibani did it to one of our guys. Can you imagine Hillier crediting them for a humanitarian act?

Euthanasia is a little different than shooting someone you think is beyond treatment
I don't think you can compare the Dutch euthanasia laws with this...

How so. Aren't the Dutch laws about killing somebody who is "beyond treatment" and dying in agony? I would want him to do it to me in similar circumstances.

[andyt]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

Maybe we should wait for the result of the Court Martial before we hang the guy?

Unless facts come out in the court martial that are substantially different than what's been reported here, I would not want to hang they guy even if he is found guilty.

[martin14]

andyt andyt:

How so. Aren't the Dutch laws about killing somebody who is "beyond treatment" and dying in agony? I would want him to do it to me in similar circumstances.

euthanasia in europe needs certain conditions,
a period of time for observation, other treatment in hospital,
I believe a couple of doctors have to sign off on it as well.

Takes a couple of years.

[andyt]

martin14 martin14:

andyt andyt:

How so. Aren't the Dutch laws about killing somebody who is "beyond treatment" and dying in agony? I would want him to do it to me in similar circumstances.

euthanasia in europe needs certain conditions,
a period of time for observation, other treatment in hospital,
I believe a couple of doctors have to sign off on it as well.

Takes a couple of years.

I understand that. But the intent is the same. And if they're going to take a couple of years, I'd rather go Samrau's way, since I'd probably be dead anyway by the time they make their decision. Don't know much about the Dutch system, but the Swiss one had been in the news lately with "death tourists" ie people going there for euthanasia. Doubt if they're waiting anything like 2 years.

[martin14]

cause it aint legal in Switzerland.....

$1:

A loophole in Swiss law permits assisted
suicide, allowing physicians to provide
lethal doses of drugs to terminally ill
patients who are willing either to ingest
the drugs or to open the valve on an intravenous
drip themselves. (Only 2 European
countries, the Netherlands and Belgium,
permit euthanasia, but they
prohibit physicians from assisting patients
from other countries who wish to end
their lives.) In 2001 the Swiss parliament
rejected a proposal to legalize euthanasia.

http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/reprint/168/5/600.pdf


I'm sure you know how to google euthanasia Netherlands for the rest.

[Brenda]

andyt andyt:

How so. Aren't the Dutch laws about killing somebody who is "beyond treatment" and dying in agony? I would want him to do it to me in similar circumstances.

I think you need to do some homework before you start insulting me.

[andyt]

Brenda Brenda:

andyt andyt:

How so. Aren't the Dutch laws about killing somebody who is "beyond treatment" and dying in agony? I would want him to do it to me in similar circumstances.

I think you need to do some homework before you start insulting me.

I think you need to take some meds before you take statements such as the above as an insult.

[EyeBrock]

andyt andyt:

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

Maybe we should wait for the result of the Court Martial before we hang the guy?

Unless facts come out in the court martial that are substantially different than what's been reported here, I would not want to hang they guy even if he is found guilty.

Obviously I was using a figure of speech. Hanging is still in for treason during war but this isn't treason.
I am very reluctant to use any media reports on things military as a basis to come to a conclusion on any issue.

Those of us who have served and still are serving know that the media is more than under-educated on the Canadian Armed Forces.
The media generally get everything wrong, from ranks to the mission.We also have a media that has been used to 'exposing' any and all negative stories it can on the military.

The fact that many Canadians once again hold the CF in high esteem doesn't seem sit well with those in the Fifth Estate who view our military with thinly disguised contempt and suspicion.

I am sure the media will gain as much mileage out of this trial as possible and none of it will reflect well on the Army and the mission in Afghanistan.

[Brenda]

andyt andyt:

Brenda Brenda:

andyt andyt:

How so. Aren't the Dutch laws about killing somebody who is "beyond treatment" and dying in agony? I would want him to do it to me in similar circumstances.

I think you need to do some homework before you start insulting me.

I think you need to take some meds before you take statements such as the above as an insult.

See, here you do it again. You have no clue what you are talking about when it comes to Dutch laws. I do. I take it you forgot I AM Dutch?

[andyt]

The Dutch laws aren't about "killing somebody who is beyond treatment and dying in agony?"

Lets say I did get that wrong, tho I would be very surprised. How is that an insult to you?

[Brenda]

andyt andyt:

The Dutch laws aren't about "killing somebody who is beyond treatment and dying in agony?"

Lets say I did get that wrong, tho I would be very surprised. How is that an insult to you?

It's a bit more complicated than shooting someone YOU think is beyond treatment in the head.
Telling me it is comparable is pretty ignorant, especially if you tell me you are right.

[andyt]

The intent is the same in both instances, that was my point.

Seems to me you're the one insulting me, not vice versa. But you know what they say: point a finger at somebody and there's three pointing back at you. Try it and see.

[Brenda]

andyt andyt:

The intent is the same in both instances, that was my point.

Seems to me you're the one insulting me, not vice versa. But you know what they say: point a finger at somebody and there's three pointing back at you. Try it and see.

You might want to get off of your high horse.
And no, the intent is not the same. One is a spur of the moment idea in a warzone, not consulting a physician, the other is a well thought of process, which has concequences for the doctor if not done correctly, and provable. The latter is usually asked for and consented by the dying person, the other one is a sole decision based on ... what... adrenaline, and not approved of by the dying one?

You might as well say that I can kill you now, because in my eyes, you are ignorant beyond treatment, and that will be called euthanasia.

[putz]

andyt andyt:

$1:

An argument could be made that the wounded Taliban was suffering and Semrau was only putting him out of his misery.

Drapeau said Canadian and international humanitarian law does not recognize mercy killings and it's unlikely such a defence would stand.

Well, mercy killing should be recognized, in civilian life too. And I think international law does recognized euthanasia in say Holland, Switzerland, etc. This seems to be a similar case. They guy was dying anyway and no treatment would help. So Semrau put him out of his misery. A decent act.

Except that many of the people who defend Semrau would probably howl like dogs if the Talibani did it to one of our guys. Can you imagine Hillier crediting them for a humanitarian act?

I am trained how to react to an ambush. I have rockets or arty coming in on my position and I will act accordingly. Want me to be part of an ambush, go on a patrol, secure and hold an area and I know exactly what to do.

Have me look at a wounded person and decided if they are beyond saving or not and I am absolutely clueless. Mercy killing is illegal for a reason. What would stop some person of say "loose morals" to go to some individual that say has a leg wound and stating he is beyond saving?

A better defense would be killed while attempting escape....

Personally, as an enemy fighter, if he wants to meet Allah let him go screaming in agony the entire way. No need to help him along.

[andyt]

Brenda Brenda:

andyt andyt:

The intent is the same in both instances, that was my point.

Seems to me you're the one insulting me, not vice versa. But you know what they say: point a finger at somebody and there's three pointing back at you. Try it and see.

You might want to get off of your high horse.
And no, the intent is not the same. One is a spur of the moment idea in a warzone, not consulting a physician, the other is a well thought of process, which has concequences for the doctor if not done correctly, and provable. The latter is usually asked for and consented by the dying person, the other one is a sole decision based on ... what... adrenaline, and not approved of by the dying one?

You might as well say that I can kill you now, because in my eyes, you are ignorant beyond treatment, and that will be called euthanasia.

spur of the moment, consulting a physician have nothing to do with the intent, which is to alleviate suffering. You're right about approval of the dying one, but then courts have ordered people to be taken off life support who didn't ask for it - ie they are allowed to die. I doubt if any of that fancy stuff applies to a war zone. Decisions do have to be made on the spur of the moment. I wasn't there, but by the facts reported so far I support this guy' decision. I doubt if letting the Talib expire naturally is a more humane response.

As for your last sentence - wow.