Caid Ivik Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 I am talking about a most dangerous crime in war times, altough many times disused by authoritative regimes. What do you think "treason against country" should mean? Or what kind of sentence would be suitable for it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IxianMace Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 Treason against a country: Things like if you work in the military forces, and give away classified information to other countries that could use it against your country, etc etc.Possible sentence: Have the criminal evicted from the country, although this will run the risk of them joining the other side, so you would probably either have to lock them up for life, or have them killed. Just my 2 solaris. :- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nampigai Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 What about a Nazi leaking classified informations to the allies during WW2? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anathema Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 He wouldn't be treated well by his superiors, obviously. How can you expect a person to be loyal to views he doesn't concur with? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjCiD Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 What about that guy who is supposde to be an ex-Iraqi Guard member with important information about the war... wonder what Saddam would do if he cought him.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nampigai Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 but we wouldn't see it as treason would we ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caid Ivik Posted March 14, 2003 Author Share Posted March 14, 2003 Traitor can be punished only by the one, who was betrayed, I think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nampigai Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 ofcourse but if the cause your country is fighting for is unjust in your eyes would you betray it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjCiD Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 Would that mean all the anti-bush/war protesters be considered traitors? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emprworm Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 the ones that go to bagdhad and bash america on Iraqi soil are traitors as far as I'm concerned.if they are not traitors (i'm referring to people that go to bagdhad and critizize america and be a human shield to help Iraq fight america), then please tell me: what is a traitor, exactly? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edric O Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 Of course they are traitors... Just like a german joining the allies in WW2 would be a traitor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nampigai Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 let's take this example.You live in a country ruled by a tyrant, you leak information to the enemy of the country. Now the country would see you as a traitor but to others you may be a hero. It's all up to the eyes that looks, and the cause you fight for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caid Ivik Posted March 14, 2003 Author Share Posted March 14, 2003 Stay in my point. What should democratic country see as treason? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davidu Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 There is a difference: bertray the ideology, or betray the country...Like giving up the positions of the tyrant that's leading you to the enemy, so the enemy can kill him... it's treason against the state, but can be useful for the people.If you give info of the troops, or maps, or if you join the enemy that the worst kind of treason.A punishment? Traitors can't be trusted, they are dangerous. Should be killed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nampigai Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 I have difficulties with answering your question, all I can say is how I whould describe a traitor. A close friend that backstabs you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caid Ivik Posted March 14, 2003 Author Share Posted March 14, 2003 So that is the highest treason... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nampigai Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 as I've said it depends on the "traitors" view points if he's opinion is against the ruler of his nation i.e. a spy for soviet in the US, then yes he's a traitor in the US but a hero in the Soviet and vice-versa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caid Ivik Posted March 14, 2003 Author Share Posted March 14, 2003 How do you think the betrayed country should punish him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nampigai Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 I don't know cause in the traitors eyes he faught for his beliefs, it may not be the same as ours, but it was his beliefs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caid Ivik Posted March 14, 2003 Author Share Posted March 14, 2003 But state doesn't punish us on base of our inner feeling of guilt, but on its laws. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nampigai Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 you're absolutely right, and the punishment will most proberly be excecution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gobalopper Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 Anyone know what happened to that guy from the FBI who was giving out classified info? I think they said they might try him with the death penalty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nampigai Posted March 15, 2003 Share Posted March 15, 2003 nope haven't heard about him, since the news about his capture. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Egeides Posted March 16, 2003 Share Posted March 16, 2003 All what is about spying is of the realm of Machiavelli. What makes the system work in such a not-very-moral thing is that since all parties are acting same, they should basically balance themselves. If a group of person would decide to not do so, then only the worst elements would get advantaged, which isn't better. So this is the situation of spying.Now, we have people that get caught and are declared as traitors, spies and so on. They are kept not always because they are immoral but because they are simply victim of "all will balance since everyone will catch everyone's spies". Looking at each element of the problem, is it moral? No. Looking at the whole, it is the more moral you can get.So the question here is how can we get the more moral possible. How? By making that such machiavelist politics are impossible, like when some protection mechanism were instaured where everyone would be stuck in. The goal of these protection mechanism is to diminish the role of machiavelism in global balance. So if there isn't single mechanism in place, spies may all be imprisoned... But here are some ways, which can be international arrangements or treaties as Geneva's "Laws on War Measures":1- Interdiction of capital sentence for spying2- Exchanges of caught spies from both sides3- Agreement to let go spies under certain conditions (when possible)4- Agreement to let go all spies after a war/confrontation5- Include liberation of spies as a condition to certain things6- God knows what elseThese were my 2 cents ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sneakgab Posted March 16, 2003 Share Posted March 16, 2003 Obviously if someone is forced to work for someone then if they go against them it is not treachery because they were not loyal to themSo in other words: If some lowly Iraq soldier/military figure betrays Saddam, then it's probably not treachery because he probably never willingly fought for him in the first place... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.