This makes me angry !!!!!!!!!
Discussion
http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1189638,00.html
These are the same people who will make excuses/justify terrorist acts ( Of whatever creed or colour before any one saddles up their horse !) and send the guys in to a situation which they would never be prepared to face themselves :furious:
These are the same people who will make excuses/justify terrorist acts ( Of whatever creed or colour before any one saddles up their horse !) and send the guys in to a situation which they would never be prepared to face themselves :furious:
Hang on a second - these weren't reactive killings in the middle of a firefight. If these allegations are true they're a bit too heavy to defend as "conflict fighting"
"Corporal Donald Payne, 34, of the Queen's Lancashire Regiment, is alleged to have inhumanely treated and killed detainee Baha Da'oud Salim Musa."
"Four other servicemen are to stand trial for the manslaughter of Iraqi civilian Ahmed Kareem in Basra on May 8, 2003. The soldiers are accused of punching and kicking four looters and forcing them into the Shat Al-Basra canal where Mr Kareem drowned."
If this had happened in the UK, after a riot say, the entire country would be in arms about police brutality.
The context is different here but the responsibilities on these chaps' heads is no less because they were in Iraq. We have a justice system to try and convict criminals - not mob rule.
Phil
(Really not a bleeding heart liberal!)
"Corporal Donald Payne, 34, of the Queen's Lancashire Regiment, is alleged to have inhumanely treated and killed detainee Baha Da'oud Salim Musa."
"Four other servicemen are to stand trial for the manslaughter of Iraqi civilian Ahmed Kareem in Basra on May 8, 2003. The soldiers are accused of punching and kicking four looters and forcing them into the Shat Al-Basra canal where Mr Kareem drowned."
If this had happened in the UK, after a riot say, the entire country would be in arms about police brutality.
The context is different here but the responsibilities on these chaps' heads is no less because they were in Iraq. We have a justice system to try and convict criminals - not mob rule.
Phil
(Really not a bleeding heart liberal!)
Mannginger said:
"Corporal Donald Payne, 34, of the Queen's Lancashire Regiment, is alleged to have inhumanely treated and killed detainee Baha Da'oud Salim Musa."
When an Iraqi bandit chopped off that British engineer's head, everyone wanted to blame Tony Blair, not the Iraqi bandit that actually committed the crime. While we're busy court-martialling our own tropps for thumping the odd bandit, how can we win? Lots of rules for us, no rules for them. Win to the bandits.
All the accusations are " Alleged" !
20/20 hindsight , particularly in an air conitioned office is a marvellous thing .
Having been at the "Sharp end" mistakes can and are made , and in every unit , the law of averages dictates there will be some " Bad un's" BUT , I do not believe the training or structures in place would allow these allegations to occur.
Regardless of the above , the politicians are the people who put the services in these positions , and they are the ones who should accept ultimate responsibility .
20/20 hindsight , particularly in an air conitioned office is a marvellous thing .
Having been at the "Sharp end" mistakes can and are made , and in every unit , the law of averages dictates there will be some " Bad un's" BUT , I do not believe the training or structures in place would allow these allegations to occur.
Regardless of the above , the politicians are the people who put the services in these positions , and they are the ones who should accept ultimate responsibility .
Point taken - I'd have been one baying for the bandit's blood to be honest - but we do have rules and we do have a line that we lay down very firmly and say "We will not cross this point"
Why do we do this? Because if we don't we become as bad as those we are trying to stop.
Justice needs to be done - for both sides. I'm sure that a lot of antiwar protestors will be begging for these chaps to be found guilty so that they can say - "See what you have done - see why this war was wrong?" Personally I really hope that they are innocent. In fact I REALLY hope it because I couldn't bear the smug response of the Independant, and the Beeb and the Guardian etc.
But if, after a due process, they are found guilty of murder and manslaughter of prisoners - then so be it. I'd rather we had the process in place than not.
Phil
Why do we do this? Because if we don't we become as bad as those we are trying to stop.
Justice needs to be done - for both sides. I'm sure that a lot of antiwar protestors will be begging for these chaps to be found guilty so that they can say - "See what you have done - see why this war was wrong?" Personally I really hope that they are innocent. In fact I REALLY hope it because I couldn't bear the smug response of the Independant, and the Beeb and the Guardian etc.
But if, after a due process, they are found guilty of murder and manslaughter of prisoners - then so be it. I'd rather we had the process in place than not.
Phil
simpo two said:
Lots of rules for us, no rules for them. Win to the bandits.
No. We come from a civilised society, and live by rules. Terrorists and the like have no rules, and can only use death and fear to try to destabilise or otherwise manipulate society. Divide and rule. Whilst we stick to our principles, our society, our culture and our civilisation remains strong. The law of the jungle, kill or be killed, may work on an individual level but not at population level, so the "bandits" cannot win.
Mannginger said:
If this had happened in the UK, after a riot say, the entire country would be in arms about police brutality.
The context is different here but the responsibilities on these chaps' heads is no less because they were in Iraq.
But these guys weren't trained to be Policeman. So one cannot reasonably expect them to behave as such.
They were in fact trained to kill people on our behalf.
The quote from Lord Goldsmith sounds very Horatio Kitchener-esque.
I look for this to be highly politicised regardless of guilt or innocence.
There have been precedents:
Unlike the beginning of the last century, however, they don't shoot you if convicted any more.
I just hope that the truth previals.
ErnestM
I look for this to be highly politicised regardless of guilt or innocence.
There have been precedents:
Harry Morant said:
"And a man's foes shall be they of his own household."
Unlike the beginning of the last century, however, they don't shoot you if convicted any more.
I just hope that the truth previals.
ErnestM
sparkythecat said:
But these guys weren't trained to be Policeman. So one cannot reasonably expect them to behave as such.
They were in fact trained to kill people on our behalf.
Yupp... but, are they not actually trained to do both things i.e. kill when in conflict and police when dealing with civilians / detainees following the same conventions that should protect them in case they were detainees themselves? I am guessing this is the same people that are sent on peace missions around the globe to police and protect, not just to kill.
We all know of cases when peace missions have gone definitely wrong, when detainees of all colours and national backgrounds have been tortured, and when actual civilians have been used as active part of a war conflict... Maybe I watch too much telly
but these are the responsibilities of the well trained soldier: to be able to tell between enemy and friend, to make a choice, act accordingly and then be responsible for their actions (or blame the chain of orders). It is a hazard of war, but thankfully the trial of these soldiers will be a democratic one, not a full on "chop his right hand and pop his left eye out" in exchange, which is what we are trying to avoid with these same wars... or so they say...
and I can assure you that Mannginger is not a bleeding heart liberal... I may be one though
Iria said:
But these guys weren't trained to be Policeman. So one cannot reasonably expect them to behave as such.
They were in fact trained to kill people on our behalf.
Yupp... but, are they not actually trained to do both things
Unless they are Military Police, probably not. Sure, you get the odd lecture or two, but they are soldiers, not police.
Also - hard to tell who the enemy is in this conflict as they don't wear uniforms. I'm surprised that there has not been more of this.
I hope that I am wrong, but I think that this trial may be driven as much for a Public Relations exercise as it is for a finding of the truth. See my previous comments regarding a previous conflict.
Morant's "trial" was a "look at us, world, we are doing the right thing" gaff as much as it was a Military tribunal/finding of fact.
ErnestM
The question is in what circumstances were these people killed/harmed. Civillians always get killed in conflicts, especially in conflicts like this one. My father dropped into suez in 1956 with the parachute regiment, they were critisised for the number of civilians killed but as my old man says, everyone was armed! If a kid comes round a corner with an AK47 you put a bullet in him and then find out if it was loaded! This has happened a lot in Iraq (unfortunately), however the allegations against these men concern the death of unarmed prisoners. I realise that they are not trained policemen but they should know whether beating someone to death is right or worng without any training! I hope they are innocent to preserve the good name of our armed forces, but if they are guilty then justice must be done.
MilnerR said:
The question is in what circumstances were these people killed/harmed.
It says they were detainees which implies they were in a cell/prison at the time, not caught in the act of looting.
Mind you if they were not looting they would not have been locked up in the first place.
nubbin said:
No. We come from a civilised society, and live by rules. Terrorists and the like have no rules, and can only use death and fear to try to destabilise or otherwise manipulate society. Divide and rule. Whilst we stick to our principles, our society, our culture and our civilisation remains strong. The law of the jungle, kill or be killed, may work on an individual level but not at population level, so the "bandits" cannot win.
That may be true but it doesn't half make it difficult to fight a war when only one of the protagonists follows the Geneva Convention. I wonder how many prisoners of war captured by the insurgents will be offered a clean bed and three square meals a day.
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff