A US Serviceman kills 16 Afghan people

Explosions in the Sky

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/story/2012-03-11/afganistan-civilian-shootings/53472526/1 Here's the article, horrible stuff :mad:

Manic Moran

Yep, doesn't do anyone any favours at all.

NTM

Explosions in the Sky

Manic Moran wrote: »

Yep, doesn't do anyone any favours at all.

NTM

Saw the thread in After Hours too Manic but I thought people in the military forum wouldn't jump on the band wagon like sometimes in after hours people do with stupid comments so I posted it here. It's a shame, the media will eat this up, terrible for the loss of life and even more the work the US are doing over there

Cardinal Richelieu

On a side note does the US Army have the death penalty?

Manic Moran

Yes.

Hasn't been implemented in a few years, but there are a couple of soldiers on Death Row right now.

A Dub in Glasgo

This guy deserves the death penalty. OP, a more accurate title would be 'A US Serviceman kills 16 Afghan civilians'

Reports of 9 children murdered, ffs

DipStick McSwindler

This post has been deleted.

KickstartHeart

Its the same with all military operations.

It just takes one or two absolute nitwits to completely throw away all the hard work and sacrifice given over years of trying to help a country in troubled times. It creates field day for those who wish for more blood-shed.

In Rwanda, a few il-discipliend Belgian paratroopers broke into homes of politicians who were openly against Belgium's part-taking in UMAMIR, and hammered them infront of their families. Completely destroyed the credibility of UNAMIR.

Imagine the damage this incident and the recent ones have done to ISAF's rep.

Discipline is key.

I would say this guy should have the book fully thrown at him as a deterrant to this kind of crap, but I read that he had had a mental break down. *Apparently*

So he can't exactly be executed or jailed for life if it was because he lost it.

Morpheus

Yes feeney,
you are correct,
the US,
sorry, the ENTIRE US ARMY (dastardly warmongering oil sucking machine that it is) have gone out of their way to make life more difficult for their allies...
Im sure this wasnt the acts of a couple of individuals, it was obviously a plan by the leadership to cause this mayhem... :rolleyes:

love your generalisation there, fantastic stuff, sad to say but this was an act by an individual, albeit a sick individual, and not one sanctioned by a higher power, yes it will effect others in the allied forces there, but ultimately it will hopefully have a small effect on the progress being made by the rest of ISAF.

go hug a tree or something.

DipStick McSwindler

This post has been deleted.

Morpheus

I'm not on a high horse, its a rather small pony...

Look you generalised and I countered your argument, albeit a tad sarcastically. you said

the US

have gone out of their way to make life difficult for their allies.

Between this incodent, the P*****G on of corpses and burning of the Koran the US really have went out of their way to make life a lot more difficult for soldiers in Afghanistan

I'm sure that the US DOD doesn't train soldiers to maim, kill and injure unarmed civilians in a warzone, they train soldiers, like other armies, to have and master controlled aggression.

Individuals can carry out atrocities for various reasons, such as in columbine or on Utoya Island in Norway, whether sane or not and I'm sure that after the investigation, we will hear about why this occurred and will see the US Army make changes in some form or other to reduce the chances of it happening again... but nothing is foolproof.

DipStick McSwindler

This post has been deleted.

Morpheus

Im in work. I cant be seen watching youtube videos! i will have to view it later tonight

Manic Moran

It's a former Marine basically saying that warfare is unpleasant and that in heavy street fighting civilians get caught up in it (Description of his time in Fallujah). Amazing revelation. "We took such heavy fire from a building that it was not feasible for troops to take it, so we called in an airstrike and destroyed the building. Civilians could have been hiding in there." "We couldn't take the front of a building due to heavy fire from the door and windows, so we blew a hole in the wall to get in the side. After we blasted through a wall, we discovered that we had killed some civilians on the far side of the wall"

Oh, and he was also saying that Bush was "allegedly re-elected", to applause.

NTM

Morpheus

If that's it, I don't see how that alludes to the statement that US forces are always heavy handed? In war tragedies occur... this was a tragedy with big ramifications, but he is one amongst thousands who HAVENT walked into a village and murdered innocents. Thats my point.

DipStick McSwindler

This post has been deleted.

johngalway

Though it would never happen, I think he should be given over to Afghan authorities for trial and punishment. Might make some think twice over doing things like it.

OS119

johngalway wrote: »

Though it would never happen, I think he should be given over to Afghan authorities for trial and punishment. Might make some think twice over doing things like it.

would he get a fair trial?

do you think he's done this for ****s and giggles or do you think he's had some kind of breakdown - in which case 'thinking twice about doing this kind of thing' doesn't come into it - he didn't/couldn't think once, let alone twice...

the normal situation for visiting forces would be that he'd be handed over to local judicial system - certainly for the UK - but that rests on a belief that he'd get a fair trial - do you believe that he would get a fair trial, or would it be a lynch mob?

A Dub in Glasgo

I think he would at least get a trial, not like those suspects rendered from various places to Guantanamo Bay!

johngalway

OS119 wrote: »

would he get a fair trial?

do you think he's done this for ****s and giggles or do you think he's had some kind of breakdown - in which case 'thinking twice about doing this kind of thing' doesn't come into it - he didn't/couldn't think once, let alone twice...

the normal situation for visiting forces would be that he'd be handed over to local judicial system - certainly for the UK - but that rests on a belief that he'd get a fair trial - do you believe that he would get a fair trial, or would it be a lynch mob?

No I don't think he'd get a fair trial at all, that's my point. The people he killed got no trial at all. To be absolutely blunt about it, better he turned the gun on himself rather than do what he did.

And before anyone says it I'm very far from a hand wringing anti-war leftie.

OS119

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

I think he would at least get a trial, not like those suspects rendered from various places to Guantanamo Bay!

so if the Americans hand this idiot over the lynch mob, i mean Afghan justice system, they have a moral free reign to send people off to dark corners never to be seen again?

if you believe that the detention without trial of those held at Gitmo is morally wrong, then you can't believe that the denial of justice to this bloke is correct without being a hypocrite.

if the Afghans had a justice system that could give him a fair trial then he should be tried by them - the offences occurred on Afghan territory, against Afghan citizens, by a person in Afghanistan there at the invitation of the Afghan government - however, they can't by any stretch of the imagination be said to have the ability/intention to have a fair trial at which he could be found not guilty, so he shouldn't be tried there.

Park Royal

He just left the base in the middle of the night........


thats alright then.......thats just grand......


guess theres no problem there then....

Morpheus

yep he'd get a fair trial,

if you call being immediately buried up to his neck in the ground and having his head smashed in by rocks.

Saying "Afghan justice" is like saying "Hitler's Tallit".

He's guilty alright, but by all that makes our society in the west what it is, he deserves a fair trial, whether that at times makes us sick to the pits of our stomachs or not... its one of the cornerstones of our justice systems in the west.

Dogwatch

The USA rarely hands over its service personnel to any other system of justice. They insist on dealing with it inhouse.

OS119

Dogwatch wrote: »

The USA rarely hands over its service personnel to any other system of justice. They insist on dealing with it inhouse.

not neccesarily true - when US service prersonnel in the UK have committed crimes against the local civilian population they get prosecuted by the UK authorities. i don't dispute that the US are a bit more anal about it than some others, but by and large where they have trust in the local justice system they are happy (ish?) to hand the alleged criminial over.

A Dub in Glasgo

OS119 wrote: »

so if the Americans hand this idiot over the lynch mob, i mean Afghan justice system, they have a moral free reign to send people off to dark corners never to be seen again?

if you believe that the detention without trial of those held at Gitmo is morally wrong, then you can't believe that the denial of justice to this bloke is correct without being a hypocrite.

if the Afghans had a justice system that could give him a fair trial then he should be tried by them - the offences occurred on Afghan territory, against Afghan citizens, by a person in Afghanistan there at the invitation of the Afghan government - however, they can't by any stretch of the imagination be said to have the ability/intention to have a fair trial at which he could be found not guilty, so he shouldn't be tried there.

'if you believe that the detention without trial of those held at Gitmo is morally wrong right, then you can't believe that the denial of justice to the victims is correct without being a hypocrite.'

I see it more like the above slight change to your paragraph

DipStick McSwindler

This post has been deleted.

OS119

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

'if you believe that the detention without trial of those held at Gitmo is morally wrong right, then you can't believe that the denial of justice to the victims is correct without being a hypocrite.'

I see it more like the above slight change to your paragraph

ah, so you believe that those accused of killing shouldn't have a fair trial because they didn't gve their victims a fair trial.

cheers, i'll remember that.

A Dub in Glasgo

OS119 wrote: »

ah, so you believe that those accused of killing shouldn't have a fair trial because they didn't gve their victims a fair trial.

cheers, i'll remember that.

No, I actually think the people who do not give a fair trial (or even a trial) when it comes to their foes or rivals, to be hypocritical if they then insist on fair trials for their own. In this case, the US and others who support what the US have done at Guantanamo Bay and then insist that they cannot hand over this killer due to lack of fairness in the justice system where he committed his crime.

DipStick McSwindler

This post has been deleted.

Morpheus

you wont see the US bury some alleged terrorist up to his neck in the sand and allow a crazy mob of overly god fearing 3rd world folks throw bricks at his head until it kills him...