Quote:
Originally Posted by Makarov
Alright. I presume that DOJ lawyers disagree with you, but ignoring that discussion for now, why should those tax payer dollars be given to the US soldier's widow? It certainly doesn't help Canadian taxpayers any.
My gut feeling (and it's nothing more than that really) is that if Khadr had defended the widow's claim, it would have had very little chance of success. There are a large number of complex issues raised (particularly with respect to conflict of laws and international law of war.)
Further, from a purely moral viewpoint, I'm not at all convinced that a militant should be personally liable for the death of an enemy combatant of an occupying force on foreign soil.
|
I'm not even advocating for that to be honest. Again, these are all just my opinions, but war is war. They are all (presumably) willing combatants. The Americans attacked, and Mr. Khadr, under orders from his dad, along with his militia, fought back. I don't think anyone should be suing anyone here.
The Americans have definitely committed crimes here in detaining and torturing a combatant.
Having a third party (Canadian government) paying reparations just doesn't make sense in my head.