american soldiers arrested

lostexpectation · 27-06-2006 05:09PM

If he was really concerned all he had to do was tell them that they shouldn't be walking around in army uniforms.

thats what he did.

If they refused to listen he could have rung the guards.

he rang them to make sure they knew of it.

Instead he had to go and be a self righteous plonker about it by attempting a "citizens arrest".

he didn't actually try to arrest them in anyway

RedPlanet · 27-06-2006 05:14PM

hmmm wrote:

If he was really concerned all he had to do was tell them that they shouldn't be walking around in army uniforms. If they refused to listen he could have rung the guards.

Instead he had to go and be a self righteous plonker about it by attempting a "citizens arrest". Like someone else said, I'm sure if it was a bunch of Irish people he wouldn't have pulled that trick. I wonder during the riots in Dublin was he to be seen wading in to restrain rioters.

Infairness he's perfectly entitled to size up his opposites.
Infact, there is in Galway at least a Riotious Behavior clause which stipulates that a crowd of 4 or more (could be 6 or more i can't remember) might be deemed unapproachable by fellow citizens, and thereby if there was some damage to property by that crowd or what have you, the council can be sued.
I was involved as a witness to a certain incident in which the Council was brought to court over this clause.
While on the stand the defending solicitor for the Council was trying to establish if the crowd was reasonably approachable or not.

So yer man is dead right not to approach a crowd of scangers breaking the law and perfectly entitled to approach some sheepish looking yanks.
I can't understand why someone has a problem with him allegedly not approaching the former (crowd of scangers).

civdef · 27-06-2006 05:27PM

I'm not sure about Galway, but in the rest of the country, a riot needs 12 people.

thebaz · 27-06-2006 05:29PM

bonkey wrote:

You're singling out US soldiers and their wearing of a uniform, and making big noises about the danger that carrying a weapon would bring despite that being a completely seperate topic.

I'm not singling out US soldiers, if it was British soldiers there would have been uproar .

The soldiers in this matter would have been as much under the orders of Bush whilst wearing civvies as they were while in uniform. This is a non-argument.

I would sit and have a chat & beer with off duty US marines no problem , but uniformed is a different story -- when they are uniformed , they are on duty , and answering to Mr Bush . maybe in your mind it is a non-argument , but i have my own mind , which obviously differs to yours.

It might make you feel better to not be able to notice them, but thats about the only difference.
Disagree again, most people will tell you , whether its gangs , soldiers , football supportes , they feal tougher and more threatening when they are uniformed , whether that is military uniform , or gangs colours , or football supporters burberry/ union jack regalia.

These soldiers were not parading around Ireland uniformed. They were outside the hotel they were staying in due to an unexpected and sudden change of plans which caused them to have to stay there.

I thought they were on the Limerick road, maybe they had attitude , again if 6 British uniformed squaddies were walking doen the limerick road ...

Do you somehow fear that if we don't kick up a fuss about some poor stranded marines who's only wish is probably to get home to their loved ones as soon as possible that next thing you know we'll have batallions of US troops parading through every corner of the nation,

As stated, initially when reading i was on the side of the poor US marine trying to get home side , but now thinking about it it, I see that it could create a presedent . The fact that the US army is so powerfull, who can stop them entering any country in the world, for there R and R , and causing a ruccus , i know it didn't happen in this instance , but its not as if the US army is squeeky clean (Guatemal Bay) , my main gripe is against there leader , and I myself am not an anti war anti American socialist --- but i repeat i don't like Bush.

civdef · 27-06-2006 05:30PM

he didn't actually try to arrest them in anyway

Hmm, coz the account on indymedia says:

Cregan immediately called for the six to stop. “I am placing you all under citizen’s arrest. Do not move” he shouted as the stunned men came to a halt.

Between that and placing a frivolous emergency call, I'm hoping a summons will be in the post soon.

lostexpectation · 27-06-2006 05:35PM

civdef wrote:

Hmm, coz the account on indymedia says:

Between that and placing a frivolous emergency call, I'm hoping a summons will be in the post soon.

arrest usually includes some form of arrest.

RedPlanet · 27-06-2006 05:37PM

civdef wrote:

I'm not sure about Galway, but in the rest of the country, a riot needs 12 people.

No civdef not a riot, i said riotous behavior.

MonkeyBox · 27-06-2006 07:10PM

I happen to agree with AngryAnderson.

bonkey wrote:

Yeah. They're unique to Ireland, aren't they. Don't find them in any other nation...

You know what they say about sarcasm, don't you?

bonkey wrote:

Whereas you are clearly understanding and accepting of people with an opinion different to your own.

Wow! Way to turn the point he made against him. Whoops... what was that I was just saying about sarcasm? Better shut my mouth.

I think the point being made is that there are a lot of loud-mouths and groups of people who will object to everything without actually doing anything... other than moan.

bonkey wrote:

People like liberals, anti-war types, anarchists, Residents against Racism, and so on.....you wouldn't say a bad word against them, but only engage in polite, rational debate. Y'know...like calling groups retards and stuff.

Yeah, I would say that most OTT liberals I know, and particularly RAR and the likes of Indymedia, are utter retards actually. They continually perceive threats that don't exist. Most of the marches that RAR go on don't even have anything to do with racism. It's hysterically funny though.

bonkey wrote:

Whereas the pro-war types have all joined up, gotten themselves a gun, and gone to put their life on the line for what they believe in. This shows the clear difference. Pro-war types aren't armchair-generals willing to preach on about how people need to be killed, but rather go and do it. Anti-war types just sit at home and complain.

Precisely. Not being a pro-war type and not knowing anyone who's particularly pro-war, I can't speak for these people that you mention. But yeah, as you say, most feverently anti-war people just sit on their arses all day long and don't do a damn thing about it.

bonkey wrote:

There's that non-liberal acceptance and tolerance of your approach again. Well done sir. Bravo. I applaud your showing those liberals how one is supposed to treat those with differing views on life with respect and dignity.

Yeah, well done. You've really turned Angry's argument on its head by making absolutely no sense other than to call him intolerant by slating loud-mouths, layabouts and malcontented idiots. If you do join the debating society after work be sure not to give up the day job.

Victor · 28-06-2006 09:45PM

RedPlanet wrote:

Since they didn't pack civvies

They would have civvies.

humanji · 29-06-2006 08:18AM

Victor wrote:

They would have civvies.

Apparently they don't. Seems a bit stupid, but hey, they are american

Manic Moran · 29-06-2006 08:46AM

jomanji wrote:

Apparently they don't. Seems a bit stupid, but hey, they are american

Why on Earth would we have packed civvies to go to a war zone?

If I had been stranded in Shannon overnight, guess what? I would have been in DCUs as well, because that's all I had handy. We only have so much cargo room, I tended to use it with stuff I needed. I'm assuming I wasn't alone. Especially if they didn't unload the airplane of all the bags.

Whereas the pro-war types have all joined up, gotten themselves a gun, and gone to put their life on the line for what they believe in.

I went... That's pro-wars: one, anti-wars: nil on this board so far, no?

Does anyone know if the US Embassy happens to have a piece of paper saying "In event of transportation difficulties, US personnel are authorised to wear their uniforms"? Anyone know for sure that they don't?

NTM

RedPlanet · 29-06-2006 09:57AM

Manic Moran wrote:

Does anyone know if the US Embassy happens to have a piece of paper saying "In event of transportation difficulties, US personnel are authorised to wear their uniforms"? Anyone know for sure that they don't?

NTM

It's not a decision the US Embassy can make Manic Moran.
It's Irish law here in Ireland.
Like i said, the soldiers should have been informed and provisions made (like a trip to Dunnes Stores on their behalf) if they want to stroll around in public.

tbh · 29-06-2006 10:07AM

RedPlanet wrote:

It's not a decision the US Embassy can make Manic Moran.
It's Irish law here in Ireland.
Like i said, the soldiers should have been informed and provisions made (like a trip to Dunnes Stores on their behalf) if they want to stroll around in public.

I think he meant that possibly the American Embassy have already been given permission for troops to wear their uniforms. I think thats the case actually, I read that Brian Cowen had given permission, and that it has never been withdrawn, but I don't know the details of that.

RedPlanet · 29-06-2006 10:19AM

tbh wrote:

I think he meant that possibly the American Embassy have already been given permission for troops to wear their uniforms. I think thats the case actually, I read that Brian Cowen had given permission, and that it has never been withdrawn, but I don't know the details of that.

Well by the sounds of it, the soldiers would require written permission by the minister. So if that were the case then it can be reasonably expected that the soldiers would have been aware of that special arrangement. It also seems rather contridictory then that after the confrontation it sounds like the gards ushered the soldiers back into the hotel out of public view.
If special permission was given, then why would they do that?

tbh · 29-06-2006 10:31AM

RedPlanet wrote:

So if that were the case then it can be reasonably expected that the soldiers would have been aware of that special arrangement.

I wouldn't be so quick to make that assumption tbh. I doubt they are briefed or anything, and it was an unscheduled stopover. of course, it's possible they did know, but I think it more likely they just figured it'd be ok.

It also seems rather contridictory then that after the confrontation it sounds like the gards ushered the soldiers back into the hotel out of public view.
If special permission was given, then why would they do that?

maybe just to allow the situation to blow over? but, I don't know either way, so probably best I shut up

humanji · 29-06-2006 11:13AM

RedPlanet wrote:

It also seems rather contridictory then that after the confrontation it sounds like the gards ushered the soldiers back into the hotel out of public view.
If special permission was given, then why would they do that?

I thought the soldiers went out for a walk or something. Maybe the gardai just gave them a lift back to the hotel?

Spastafarian · 29-06-2006 12:44PM

Wait a minute?? There's 4 american soldiers in uniform in ennis?? Aaaaaaargh!
We're all doomed!!
AAAAAAARGH!
Somebody call the president!

Manic Moran · 29-06-2006 05:52PM

tbh wrote:

I wouldn't be so quick to make that assumption tbh. I doubt they are briefed or anything, and it was an unscheduled stopover. of course, it's possible they did know, but I think it more likely they just figured it'd be ok.

I don't see why they'd be told about Ireland's laws on the issue. If it were illegal, they'd have been told. If the appropriate permissions had been obtained by the embassy, then why bother them with the details? All they need be told is "OK, you're going to a hotel. Everything has been taken care of." They're presumably not told who's signing the bill for the hotel either. Or hiring the bus to go to the airport.

NTM

thebaz · 29-06-2006 05:57PM

Manic Moran wrote:

I don't see why they'd be told about Ireland's laws on the issue. If it were illegal, they'd have been told. If the appropriate permissions had been obtained by the embassy, then why bother them with the details? All they need be told is "OK, you're going to a hotel. Everything has been taken care of." They're presumably not told who's signing the bill for the hotel either. Or hiring the bus to go to the airport.

NTM

are you a marine ?

lostexpectation · 29-06-2006 06:01PM

tbh wrote:

I think he meant that possibly the American Embassy have already been given permission for troops to wear their uniforms. I think thats the case actually, I read that Brian Cowen had given permission, and that it has never been withdrawn, but I don't know the details of that.

he didn't give them permission to be or wear there uniforms in town

humanji · 29-06-2006 07:01PM

lostexpectation wrote:

he didn't give them permission to be or wear there uniforms in town

Are you sure of that? I'm sure it'd be some sort of blanket permission that is ambiguos enough to cover a lot of things.

american soldiers arrested

Comments