Discussion
ClaphamGT3 said:
Dkta2989 said:
ClamphamGt3 I will ask you the same questions as I did Mike
Royal Engineers - you?Because he murdered someone. What part of that is hard to grasp?
But afterwards, clearly not still full of adrenaline, and with enough forethought to ponder the international legal ramifications of the act? That's murder.
Spin this around the other way. What happens if an enemy combatant shoots a wounded British or allied soldier while not in battle? Do you know?
http://compunews.com/gus/massacres.htm
Are you going to start a petition for the pardon of these Germans? Why not?
There's a lot of thick people out there with zero ethics
The issue is not whether Marine A should have gone to jail. Of course he should. The issue is why no-one else in his chain of command was disciplined.
This is slightly close to the bone for me, because if I walk 100 feet from my desk now, I'll be standing outside the office of someone connected to the incident.
The issue is not whether Marine A should have gone to jail. Of course he should. The issue is why no-one else in his chain of command was disciplined.
This is slightly close to the bone for me, because if I walk 100 feet from my desk now, I'll be standing outside the office of someone connected to the incident.
Joey Ramone said:
There's a lot of thick people out there with zero ethics
.
There certainly are, and most of them are waging jihad against us. Frankly, I don't care what our soliders do with them..
Maybe 'our' 'ethics' are why they manage to maintain their efforts seemingly indefinitely?
REALIST123 said:
There certainly are, and most of them are waging jihad against us. Frankly, I don't care what our soliders do with them.
Maybe 'our' 'ethics' are why they manage to maintain their efforts seemingly indefinitely?
This.Maybe 'our' 'ethics' are why they manage to maintain their efforts seemingly indefinitely?
Maybe if they really let loose the dogs of war this battle would be over very quickly.
Joey Ramone said:
There's a lot of thick people out there with zero ethics
The issue is not whether Marine A should have gone to jail. Of course he should. The issue is why no-one else in his chain of command was disciplined.
This is slightly close to the bone for me, because if I walk 100 feet from my desk now, I'll be standing outside the office of someone connected to the incident.
Really? Others helped him to pull the trigger?The issue is not whether Marine A should have gone to jail. Of course he should. The issue is why no-one else in his chain of command was disciplined.
This is slightly close to the bone for me, because if I walk 100 feet from my desk now, I'll be standing outside the office of someone connected to the incident.
Corpulent Tosser said:
croyde said:
This.
Maybe if they really let loose the dogs of war this battle would be over very quickly.
Which battle would that be ?Maybe if they really let loose the dogs of war this battle would be over very quickly.
Anyway, petition not signed, he knew exactly what he was doing and has been punished for it.
DMN said:
TTwiggy said:
Sorry no. He committed a crime and was tried and found guilty of it.
On a personal level he has my sympathies and I'll not condemn his actions out of hand, but I cannot call for a pardon either.
I echo the above comment. Not signing.On a personal level he has my sympathies and I'll not condemn his actions out of hand, but I cannot call for a pardon either.
Just because someone's in the forces (and has my respect and admiration for that) it doesn't mean no laws apply to them. You can't just run round knowingly committing war crimes and murdering people. Which he clearly did know seeing as he plainly said it.
Maybe the guy he shot was a
, maybe he deserved to die, maybe he didn't, but Marine A had no place to make himself judge, jury and executionerMikeGTi said:
There are laws that govern conflict and we must stick to them even if our enemies do not.
Interesting thought process, but where has the moral high ground got us? The population there are still making efforts to direct terror attacks on our home soil. The troops have been in the desert for over a decade, hamstrung by these ROE that make them look like scared boyscouts in front of an enemy that considers them an invader. This marine was placed in a difficult situation, knowing that the injured man, if saved, would probably continue to wage war against him. I agree that there is no place for rule breakers. It appears what is really needed is a change to ROE/Geneva Convention or whatever it will take to allow for the disposal of injured and incapacitated combatants - that would level the playing field, as if you're captured by the enemy out there you can be certain you won't be coming back. I suppose it gives the Taliban some comfort, to know we must play by the rules and they can do what they like.
ETA: I think any serving military personnel would do well not to sign that petition, imagine if it got back to your boss that your name was on the list of supporters? I imagine punishment for not toeing the party line would swiftly follow.
Edited by Baryonyx on Thursday 23 October 10:40
Grumfutock said:
Really? Others helped him to pull the trigger?
His chain of command created an environment within the unit whereby it was considered acceptable by members of that unit to execute a prisoner of war. Put it this way. When people within the RM spoke to me about the incident, and knowing who the CO was, they simply said 'Well, with him in charge, something like that was always going to happen'
There was also a high profile resignation within the RM over the fact that no-one else was deemed culpable, when in fact they should have been sanctioned.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff