View Full Version : First the Koran Burnings, Now This; I Think We're Donesies in the 'Stan
The Koran burnings were confirmed as an accident, yet severely damaging to our relationship with Afghans.
Now a (insane and possibly drunk) US soldier is accused of murdering 16 civilians (http://news.sky.com/home/world-news/article/16186397), including a two-year-old child. I think we're going to be shown the door pretty quickly.
The gunman, believed to be a lone rogue soldier, went from house to house in two villages in southern Kandahar during the night.
Shooting began at around 3am, according to officials. Among the victims were at least three women, a child aged just two and elderly men.
Neighbours said the soldier had appeared drunk and relatives of the victims claimed chemicals were poured over the dead bodies to burn them. Pictures of the scene appeared to show the remains of burning in at least one of the houses. [...]
The gunman, reported to be an Army staff sergeant, returned to his base after the spree and is said to have turned himself in. US officials have confirmed he is in custody.
...I think we're going to be shown the door pretty quickly...
Sounds good to me. Let's get outta there pronto and leave it to the vultures.
Montmorency
03-11-2012, 22:12
He did what no other American soldier was brave enough to accomplish.
He is the perfect American. :cry:
He did what no other American soldier was brave enough to accomplish.
He is the perfect American. :cry:
Must ... not ... feed ... troll post ...
Gah! I can't resist. Are you seriously proposing that mindless, wanton slaughter of civilians is considered desirable on any level of the American military or American society? Can you back that up in any way whatsoever?
Centurion1
03-11-2012, 23:37
The Koran burnings were confirmed as an accident, yet severely damaging to our relationship with Afghans.
Now a (insane and possibly drunk) US soldier is accused of murdering 16 civilians (http://news.sky.com/home/world-news/article/16186397), including a two-year-old child. I think we're going to be shown the door pretty quickly.
The gunman, believed to be a lone rogue soldier, went from house to house in two villages in southern Kandahar during the night.
Shooting began at around 3am, according to officials. Among the victims were at least three women, a child aged just two and elderly men.
Neighbours said the soldier had appeared drunk and relatives of the victims claimed chemicals were poured over the dead bodies to burn them. Pictures of the scene appeared to show the remains of burning in at least one of the houses. [...]
The gunman, reported to be an Army staff sergeant, returned to his base after the spree and is said to have turned himself in. US officials have confirmed he is in custody.
We leave when we want this people have no more ability to "force" us out as we do to impart some sort of civilized behavior upon them.
A disgusting tragedy regardless and a disgrace to us armed forces. This man will suffer the brunt of ucmj and military justice is very strict thankfully.
We leave when we want this people have no more ability to "force" us out
Well, they do have a civilian government; we gave it to them. And while I agree that they could not force us out directly, they could make it entirely too absurd and costly for us to stay.
Montmorency
03-11-2012, 23:46
Must ... not ... feed ... troll post ...
Gah! I can't resist. Are you seriously proposing that mindless, wanton slaughter of civilians is considered desirable on any level of the American military or American society? Can you back that up in any way whatsoever?That you would speak thus of a saint and hero of America such as this fellow only serves to demonstrate your lack of patriotism.
Why do you want to the evil Afghan Muslim terrorists to dismantle our beautiful nation? You should probably be deported.
Centurion1
03-11-2012, 23:56
Well, they do have a civilian government; we gave it to them. And while I agree that they could not force us out directly, they could make it entirely too absurd and costly for us to stay.
I said nothing about civilian governments, I referred to civilized behavior. You stretch to compare the corrupt entity they describe as a national government to a functioning civilian government. We are trying to impart 21st century thought upon a population hell bent on remaining within the 1300's.
rory_20_uk
03-12-2012, 00:44
Frankly, I'm amazed that more don't crack. Driving around every day, trying to help people. Getting shot at and and mates blown to pieces as a "thank you". Years pass and nothing lastingly good has been achieved, merely a load of corrupt politicians line their own pockets and promote their family. I get pissed off enough at people throwing litter into my garden.
End of the day, he's guilty of multiple murder. It looks premeditated. Is that life in prison or executed?
~:smoking:
End of the day, he's guilty of multiple murder. It looks premeditated. Is that life in prison or executed?
Under the UCMJ (http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinfo/mcm/bl118.htm), that's most likely a death sentence. There are also provisions for manslaughter and negligent homicide, but very little about extenuating circumstances, of which this man appears to have few.
Tellos Athenaios
03-12-2012, 01:04
Don't think the USA will be out of Afghanistan quite so easily, or so quickly. Think Yemen, or Pakistan.
Either way he probably is very much done in Afghanistan, as his mere presence now puts the people around him in danger.
Papewaio
03-12-2012, 01:10
Can't he just quit the army to avoid a court marshal?
a completely inoffensive name
03-12-2012, 01:12
All this means is that we need to stay another year to regain the trust of the locals.
Must ... not ... feed ... troll post ...
Gah! I can't resist. Are you seriously proposing that mindless, wanton slaughter of civilians is considered desirable on any level of the American military or American society? Can you back that up in any way whatsoever?
Not troll, sarcasm. Seriously Lemur, that was pretty obvious. :stare:
Either way it was a horrible thing to do, but I'm not going to guess what the response will be as I'm honestly not sure it will be the same as with the quran burnings.
It's certainly an option of course but this is different from attacking their god. The Taliban blow afghans up and noone protests. :shrug:
Frankly, I'm amazed that more don't crack. Driving around every day, trying to help people. Getting shot at and and mates blown to pieces as a "thank you". Years pass and nothing lastingly good has been achieved, merely a load of corrupt politicians line their own pockets and promote their family. I get pissed off enough at people throwing litter into my garden...
Very much so. I am very curious as to what his motivation was, but it wouldn't surprise me if he just went berserk from stress or lost a buddy of his to a "friendly" afghan "ally". We'll just have to wait and see what the investigation unearths.
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
03-12-2012, 01:54
Can't he just quit the army to avoid a court marshal?
Then he should be handed over to the Afgans, and probably hanged. Actually, they should do that anyway - but they won't.
Then he should be handed over to the Afgans, and probably hanged. Actually, they should do that anyway - but they won't.
Of course not. Trying one of our guys in an Afghani kangaroo court? No, thanks.
Noncommunist
03-12-2012, 05:13
I've read that it might not be as bad as the Koran burnings. After all, we've been making mistakes like this for years. And I think the Afghans perceive the Taliban as being about as bad as us despite the fact that we've killed far less of them than the Taliban.
HopAlongBunny
03-12-2012, 05:55
A tragedy on both sides of the coin.
The soldier will at least likely receive better "justice" than the kangaroo court that tried a 15 year old Canadian for being a "found-in".
War destroys people and our facade of civility; win or lose there is a cost.
Very much so. I am very curious as to what his motivation was, but it wouldn't surprise me if he just went berserk from stress or lost a buddy of his to a "friendly" afghan "ally". We'll just have to wait and see what the investigation unearths.
Maybe the family members of the people he killed may also "just" go berserk in response and kill 14 american women and children each and so on.
That would really help the situation.
Major Robert Dump
03-12-2012, 09:03
He should be executed.
The public response will not be as bad as the burnings, which shows how messed up these people are. Afterall, Afghans pop all the time and kill each other and us. A few of the blue on blu shootings of NATO troops have been guys who were lsoing their marbles, like the pilot who offed a room full of afghans and americans, he just went berserk due to personal issues.
What I find amusing is Karzais speed at the annual Womens Day gathering, where he says they do not need foreign troops because their army can stand on its own. Of course, we would still pay their army since the country generates only about 2% of the tax revenue it needs and they have no standardized tax base or collection method.
I am also amused at us handing over the detention facility to the Afghans, because the caveat is that we will continue to provide "logistics support" for it in the coming years, which is fany talk for "we pay for your prison"
I would actually love to see this guy handed over to the Afghans if the miltary justice system deems that he is guilty.
rory_20_uk
03-12-2012, 10:01
This sick, disturbed, evil individual deserves the firing squad and I hope he gets it.
If I understand this correctly, it wasn't a mission gone wrong but rather a pre-meditated act by one guy.
I would agree with the terms sick and disturbed but based on what little I know so far I think that it is a bit of a leap to call him "evil". First off, he gave himself up for punishment opposed to nicking someone else's rifle and doing it. Secondly he "only" killed everyone in two houses. I imagine he could have killed a far greater number if he'd wanted to.
Although it is possible that he joined the army, worked his way up from the ranks in some 10 year strategy to kill two families, but it seems much more likely that he is sick and disturbed by what he's been through.
~:smoking:
a completely inoffensive name
03-12-2012, 10:13
Secondly he "only" killed everyone in two houses. I imagine he could have killed a far greater number if he'd wanted to.
https://i.imgur.com/IUSQi.jpg
Sarmatian
03-12-2012, 10:52
Although it is possible that he joined the army, worked his way up from the ranks in some 10 year strategy to kill two families, but it seems much more likely that he is sick and disturbed by what he's been through.
~:smoking:
Very much possible but it's still possible that it is premeditated, like a revenge for his buddies or something like that.
You can kill our people, but you can't kill our book! :laugh4:
Terrible thing though, regardless of the Afghani priorities. Didn't know they executed soldiers anymore, I thought they just got jailed for some ungodly amount of time instead.
rory_20_uk
03-12-2012, 12:17
As a Soldier he would have had constant re-enforcement on what the right thing to do was. He would be asked regularly about his mental state, he would attend constant sensitivity classes, and every single mission briefing would contain something like "please don't hurt the civilians." There is no excuse for not being able to discern right and wrong in this case. Not even a PTSD flashback is excuse enough for this, as he would have had ample opportunities to describe his feelings to someone who could help. The Army doesn't hold your career back for that sort of thing any more, the stigma is not what it used to be.
He's asked about his mental state. If that is as reliable as the health screening I do, then people... lie - "no sir, not a drop" then presented with end stage liver failure and was dead in 2 weeks.
Awww, sensitivity classes. That makes everything OK... You might as well say that classes to detect Non Accidental Injury in children stops all child abuse.
Please don't hurt the civilians. That stops people who suddenly snap...
Some people talk. Some don't. There are ample ways for people to seek help if they are depressed. That doesn't mean some don't commit suicide. The system might be stopping 99 out of 100 persons who might have done this, but this is that one person who the system didn't catch. It happens. No system is perfect.
I'm not defending him. He did it. Perhaps a very good lawyer will argue temporary insanity and when he realised what he'd done he immediately gave himself up. He not only killed a load of locals, but far more importantly our troops might get injured or killed as a result of this.
~:smoking:
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
03-12-2012, 12:20
Of course not. Trying one of our guys in an Afghani kangaroo court? No, thanks.
And there it is... reason one why it isn't working over there.
All they'll do is hang him, so why not hand him over?
Nice to know you value his life over the people he killed.
PanzerJaeger
03-12-2012, 13:00
And there it is... reason one why it isn't working over there.
I would wager that there are a fair number of much larger issues at play in the failure to make progress in Afghanistan than American stateside arrogance. COIN, for better or worse, is centered on winning over the locals and great efforts have been taken to attain that goal.
Centurion1
03-12-2012, 13:15
And there it is... reason one why it isn't working over there.
All they'll do is hang him, so why not hand him over?
Nice to know you value his life over the people he killed.
No I just believe in fair and western justice. He WILL die if found guilty by the military. And he will receive a FAIR trial. If he is tried by the barbarians he will not receive a fair trial and he will die all the same albeit in a more gruesome manner which is completely irrelevant.
rory_20_uk
03-12-2012, 13:50
Ridiculous. You're basically saying that because he didn't take the options he had seriously that his choice is valid? What?
No... I was stating that those things that are put in place might help. To think that a few classes are going to manage to offset the hell of that country is is, well, ridiculous.
That I can understand what he did does not mean I condone what he did. The validity of what he did surely depends on one's personal stand. I don't think it's valid but then I don't think that the whole enterprise is either.
~:smoking:
No I just believe in fair and western justice. He WILL die if found guilty by the military. And he will receive a FAIR trial. If he is tried by the barbarians he will not receive a fair trial and he will die all the same albeit in a more gruesome manner which is completely irrelevant.
Bin Laden didn't get a fair trial, so why should this mass murderer get one?
Centurion1
03-12-2012, 14:26
Bin Laden didn't get a fair trial, so why should this mass murderer get one?
Strawman!
Completely different scenarios. Bin Laden is an established enemy of the country engaged in armed resistance and attempting to kill us with his legions of men and resources. This guy is one single man.
More importantly this man turned himself in and surrendered willingly. Bin Laden died in combat. Do you think we should shoot him in the head now to make it more comparable to Bin Laden?
I didn't see you complaining when the norwegian shooter was taken into custody? Is that man due a fair trial?
Then why isnt this man?
Please bring something more substantial to the table next time.
johnhughthom
03-12-2012, 14:28
Ridiculous. You're basically saying that because he didn't take the options he had seriously that his choice is valid? What?
It may not have been as simple as not taking the options available to him, mental illness is not always something easy to talk about. It may well be he didn't even realise himself, and he suddenly snapped. He could have found it difficult to talk about, or perhaps was afraid of what was happening. Calling it a choice may well be invalid. Then again, he may have planned it in a rational and calculated manner. We don't know.
As has been said before, I am surprised this doesn't happen more often, the unique nature of this case should be a mark of the professionalism of the forces in Afghanistan.
rory_20_uk
03-12-2012, 14:43
Bin Laden died in combat.
As long as the term "combat" means that there was a gun in the same room as Bin Laden, as I believe that he was unarmed at the time he was assassinated in an illegal raid in a foreign sovereign power (illegality as defined by both Pakistani, UN and American law).
~:smoking:
Vladimir
03-12-2012, 15:00
As long as the term "combat" means that there was a gun in the same room as Bin Laden, as I believe that he was unarmed at the time he was assassinated in an illegal raid in a foreign sovereign power (illegality as defined by both Pakistani, UN and American law).
~:smoking:
We're not equating illegal with bad are we?
No... I was stating that those things that are put in place might help. To think that a few classes are going to manage to offset the hell of that country is is, well, ridiculous.
That I can understand what he did does not mean I condone what he did. The validity of what he did surely depends on one's personal stand. I don't think it's valid but then I don't think that the whole enterprise is either.
~:smoking:
How can you defend something like this? That is the entire problem with liberals right there, they try to absolve the individual of responsibility. When you murder two entire families, you have to take responsibility for it. Does it even matter if he was in a messed up mental state? There are plenty of service men and women who have severe PTSD and don't go around killing civilians. Whether or not he had mental problems, he is still a dangerous murderer who needs to be put down. Plain and simple.
rory_20_uk
03-12-2012, 15:34
No. But if one gets into basing who can go around killing people on whether it is "bad" nor not, whose definition of "bad" do we use? That is one of the main reason for having laws in the first place. Most countries answer this question with "mine", so of course every one plays by the rules unless they don't feel like doing so.
~:smoking:
Have the Afghans offially trial him, what better way to distantiate from this, no longer army, no longer American. Symbolism of course but a gesture nonetheless
Have the Afghans offially trial him, what better way to distantiate from this, no longer army, no longer American. Symbolism of course but a gesture nonetheless
Because they don't know the meaning of the word justice. We should try him here, assure that he gets a fair trial (which he definitely will not over there), and then if he is found guilty, put him down ourselves in a humane manner. Hanging is a barbarous, torturous, way of killing that has no place in the modern world.
If he was one of their, I would say let them do whatever they want, because it is not our responsibility. But he is not one of theirs, so we have a duty to ensure that there is a fair trial and (if found guilty) a humane execution.
Because they don't know the meaning of the word justice. We should try him here, assure that he gets a fair trial (which he definitely will not over there), and then if he is found guilty, put him down ourselves in a humane manner. Hanging is a barbarous, torturous, way of killing that has no place in the modern world.
If he was one of their, I would say let them do whatever they want, because it is not our responsibility. But he is not one of theirs, so we have a duty to ensure that there is a fair trial and (if found guilty) a humane execution.
He will be hanged by Afghan officials. Like it or not in their eyes he's an American soldier not a drunk psychopath. Denouncing his citizinship of the US is a way out of this, both for Obama and Karzai
I'd rather be hanged than the chair, gaschamber or injection by the way, just not Iranian style.
rory_20_uk
03-12-2012, 16:10
Hanging if done by a trained professional is a pretty quick and painless way to go. If its screwed up then it is extremely unpleasant. Assuming the locals can screw even this up, why not firing squad? Get some of the relatives in on it to help them expunge the blood debt.
~:smoking:
Hanging if done by a trained professional is a pretty quick and painless way to go. If its screwed up then it is extremely unpleasant. Assuming the locals can screw even this up, why not firing squad? Get some of the relatives in on it to help them expunge the blood debt.
~:smoking:
Don't let the locals have him, turn him over to Afghan authority. Karzai needs to show that he's not a puppet and can actually make a fist, and Obama can get away with 'he really shouldn't have done that', few pics of the victims on TV et voila,
I just solved this crisis.
Sarmatian
03-12-2012, 16:26
Because they don't know the meaning of the word justice. We should try him here, assure that he gets a fair trial (which he definitely will not over there),
I don't know... Outcomes of trials where Americans judged Americans for murders of people of other nationalities usually ended with a slap on the wrist for the accused.
Hanging if done by a trained professional is a pretty quick and painless way to go. If its screwed up then it is extremely unpleasant. Assuming the locals can screw even this up, why not firing squad? Get some of the relatives in on it to help them expunge the blood debt.
~:smoking:
Because I know that if I were a relative, I would aim for the stomach or nads. You shouldn't have that much passion being involved with an execution.
Professional firing squad, aiming for the head would do just fine. Of all the ways one can be executed, I think I would find that the easiest and least humiliating.
I don't know... Outcomes of trials where Americans judged Americans for murders of people of other nationalities usually ended with a slap on the wrist for the accused.
Depends, are the victims someone unimportant, or are they someone incredibly important like muslims? When they are muslims, and something like this that threatens an important diplomatic balance has happened, I think we can count on a just punishment if guilty.
rory_20_uk
03-12-2012, 16:40
Because I know that if I were a relative, I would aim for the stomach or nads. You shouldn't have that much passion being involved with an execution.
Professional firing squad, aiming for the head would do just fine. Of all the ways one can be executed, I think I would find that the easiest and least humiliating.
Fair point. But if you had 4 professionals, it would not really matter what the relatives did or didn't do. They'd still be nigh on instantly dead in a hail of bullets.
~:smoking:
Fair point. But if you had 4 professionals, it would not really matter what the relatives did or didn't do. They'd still be nigh on instantly dead in a hail of bullets.
~:smoking:
But you could still have an instant or two too much or excruciating pain. We are not the Medieval Catholic Church, and we should not be torturing prisoners.
To quote my favorite game of all time:
Bullet to the head, now that's justice!
Anything else is revenge.
We have an agreement with Afghanistan as well as every other country hosting U.S. troops that explicitly states that our soldiers get tried by our military tribunal, not the local courts. No exceptions. If this happened in Germany, our soldier would still be 100% immune from German prosecution (at that point he'd wish he wasn't, but that's another story). That's the way we run things everywhere, not just in Afghanistan. If some country doesn't like that, it's their prerogative, that just means that we will not station our troops there (as was the case with Iraq last fall).
Kikuchiyo
03-12-2012, 16:57
We have an agreement with Afghanistan as well as every other country hosting U.S. troops that explicitly states that our soldiers get tried by our military tribunal, not the local courts. No exceptions. If this happened in Germany, our soldier would still be 100% immune from German prosecution (at that point he'd wish he wasn't, but that's another story). That's the way we run things everywhere, not just in Afghanistan. If some country doesn't like that, it's their prerogative, that just means that we will not station our troops there (as was the case with Iraq last fall).
I think that misses out the minor detail that Afghanistan and Iraq were actually invaded and did not exactly have a choice regarding the stationing of troops...
We have an agreement with Afghanistan as well as every other country hosting U.S. troops that explicitly states that our soldiers get tried by our military tribunal, not the local courts. No exceptions.
If I was a Afghan village chief in a remote village who thinks all soldiers are Russian, how would you explain that to me after this ( supposed) spree of uncalled viollence. Sorry have some goats? Tell me how you are not being just conquering the place exactly, and why said chief should see it any differently
Vladimir
03-12-2012, 17:07
I think that misses out the minor detail that Afghanistan and Iraq were actually invaded and did not exactly have a choice regarding the stationing of troops...
Perhaps there is a term you are not familiar with: SOFA (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=sofa%20afghanistan&source=web&cd=1&sqi=2&ved=0CEIQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fas.org%2Fsgp%2Fcrs%2Fnatsec%2FRL34531.pdf&ei=Cx9eT6qHJ6Ly0gGz_vzDDw&usg=AFQjCNEPs_LS9uo2F5REl4DbsQxoAnnK4g&cad=rja).
rory_20_uk
03-12-2012, 17:08
I think that misses out the minor detail that Afghanistan and Iraq were actually invaded and did not exactly have a choice regarding the stationing of troops...
Oh, it's fine as the new (puppet) government that was instated is as pleased as punch to have the opportunity to embezzle as much money as he and his extended clan can get away with whilst a war is fought over the barren wasteland that is his country.
If they say no, hit 'em and ask 'em again. Eventually you'll get the right answer.
~:smoking:
I think that misses out the minor detail that Afghanistan and Iraq were actually invaded and did not exactly have a choice regarding the stationing of troops...
Iraq did have a choice, it expressed its choice, which is why we're out of there: they refused to extend the agreement. Same agreement is in place with Karzai.
If I was a Afghan village chief in a remote village who thinks all soldiers are Russian, how would you explain that to me after this ( supposed) spree of uncalled viollence. Sorry have some goats? Tell me how you are not being just conquering the place exactly, and why said chief should see it any differently
I'm not sure I understand your question.
[QUOTE=rvg;2053431081I'm not sure I understand your question.[/QUOTE]
What do you want from them, to suddenly leave everything to you? Trust your courts? You are a foreign invader, you expect grattitude because you mowed their lawn but it's still your boot that really affects them more directly
Kikuchiyo
03-12-2012, 17:26
Perhaps there is a term you are not familiar with: SOFA (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=sofa%20afghanistan&source=web&cd=1&sqi=2&ved=0CEIQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fas.org%2Fsgp%2Fcrs%2Fnatsec%2FRL34531.pdf&ei=Cx9eT6qHJ6Ly0gGz_vzDDw&usg=AFQjCNEPs_LS9uo2F5REl4DbsQxoAnnK4g&cad=rja).
Yes... but if the countries were invaded in the first place, then how exactly is that worth the paper it's printed on?
Iraq did have a choice, it expressed its choice, which is why we're out of there: they refused to extend the agreement. Same agreement is in place with Karzai.
So now Iraq and Afghanistan chose to be invaded...?
What do you want from them, to suddenly leave everything to you? Trust your courts? You are a foreign invader, you expect grattitude because you mowed their lawn but it's still your boot that really affects them more directly
I don't really care what the average Nasratullah wants. Our government has an agreement with their government on how to handle these cases. Thus, the case will be handled according to the agreement. Public outcry over this while understandable is completely irrelevant.
Kikuchiyo
03-12-2012, 17:30
Our government has an agreement with their government
An agreement with a now infamous puppet regime and corrupt president - not an agreement with the Afghan people, the various tribes, etc...
So now Iraq and Afghanistan chose to be invaded...?
Did I say that?
An agreement with a now infamous puppet regime and corrupt president - not an agreement with the Afghan people, the various tribes, etc...
The "infamous puppet regime" is what the U.N. recognizes as a legitimate afghan government. They'll do.
Kikuchiyo
03-12-2012, 17:36
I see people talking about a signed agreement regarding the deployment of troops, etc... such an agreement would only be relevant if the US and it's allies were invited in, in the first place...
Or is this a debate where we just pretend the Karzai regime is legit and just take it from there...?
I see people talking about a signed agreement regarding the deployment of troops, etc... such an agreement would only be relevant if the US and it's allies were invited in, in the first place...
Says who?
Or is this a debate where we just pretend the Karzai regime is legit and just take it from there...?
The U.N. pretends he's legit. That makes anything he signs legit. That's good enough for me. Public opinion on this is inconsequential.
Kikuchiyo
03-12-2012, 17:47
The U.N. pretends he's legit. That makes anything he signs legit. That's good enough for me. Public opinion on this is inconsequential.
I see... so if he's good enough for you and the UN, that's fine, the Afghan people don't even factor... that pretty much says it all.
I see... so if he's good enough for you and the UN, that's fine, the Afghan people don't even factor... that pretty much says it all.
Yes. Welcome to the real world.
Kikuchiyo
03-12-2012, 17:49
Yes. Welcome to the real world.
No thanks I'm happier in "fantasy land"...
What kinda bothers me, this guy murdered a lot of people, just shot them including a 2 year old. Why would you do such a thing, and most of all why is American law so important here. It was a a two year old that got killed, she knows nothing about law. Why such trust in it, it can be so ugly, rip kiddie
What kinda bothers me, this guy murdered a lot of people, just shot them including a 2 year old. Why would you do such a thing, and most of all why is American law so important here. It was a a two year old that got killed, she knows nothing about law. Why such trust in it, it can be so ugly, rip kiddie
Yes, what happened was horrible, but that's not a reason to feed the guy to the lynch mob. Let the tribunal do its thing, the guy will get his date with the firing squad and we'll call it a day.
Kikuchiyo
03-12-2012, 18:03
Perhaps there is a term you are not familiar with: SOFA (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=sofa%20afghanistan&source=web&cd=1&sqi=2&ved=0CEIQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fas.org%2Fsgp%2Fcrs%2Fnatsec%2FRL34531.pdf&ei=Cx9eT6qHJ6Ly0gGz_vzDDw&usg=AFQjCNEPs_LS9uo2F5REl4DbsQxoAnnK4g&cad=rja).
U.S. personnel are immune from criminal prosecution by Afghan authorities, and are immune from civil and administrative jurisdiction
except with respect to acts performed outside the course of their duties.
I wonder... though no doubt there's some other clause...
Would that apply to say... abandoning your post and heading off to butcher 16 civilians?
An agreement with a now infamous puppet regime and corrupt president - not an agreement with the Afghan people, the various tribes, etc...
That is how government has to operate cynwulf. If most of the Southern and Western states say that Obama is a corrupt president and that he is no longer representing the Country, does that mean they have the right to not abide by US treaties and to make their own laws? If you are going to get the benefits of being in a country and under a government, you have to follow the rules. In any county and under government you will have a significant body of people are unhappy with the current regime and think it dictatorial (you did with Bush, you do with Obama, you did with Clinton, etc, etc, etc). That does not mean that the people in that country don't have to obey their country's laws.
Kikuchiyo
03-12-2012, 18:22
Vuk there is a huge difference - unlike Karzai, Obama was not installed into office by an occupying force.
rory_20_uk
03-12-2012, 18:26
Indeed. I've known many men and women in my life who suffered from severe PTSD. Flashbacks are real and they do happen, but they don't cause someone to sneak out and assassinate two houses full of people. That's for the movies. Closest thing to that which actually happens would be someone freaking out in a crowd and taking a few shots.
A schizoid break would do it though.
~:smoking:
A schizoid break would do it though.
~:smoking:
Like that Breivik guy.
Tellos Athenaios
03-12-2012, 18:49
Yes. Welcome to the real world.
That would be true if said government actually had the authority to back up and enforce its agreements internally. It hasn't, so your argument is, as they say, invalid.
That would be true if said government actually had the authority to back up and enforce its agreements internally. It hasn't, so your argument is, as they say, invalid.
Says who?
Tellos Athenaios
03-12-2012, 19:01
Says who?
Well last I looked, shooting at American soldiers whilst in your official capacity of Afghan cop in response to Koran burnings wasn't exactly part of stated mandate by the Karzai government. Could be wrong, though.
Shaka_Khan
03-12-2012, 19:05
Occording to NPR (http://www.npr.org/), the locals believe that there were many American soldiers involved.
Listen to the Morning Edition.
Well last I looked, shooting at American soldiers whilst in your official capacity of Afghan cop in response to Koran burnings wasn't exactly part of stated mandate by the Karzai government. Could be wrong, though.
Just like I'm sure that this guy who offed 16 people got a direct order from Washington to do so.
Occording to NPR (http://www.npr.org/), the locals believe that there were many American soldiers involved.
Listen to the Morning Edition.
That's even more of a reason to ignore what they "believe" or "think".
Vladimir
03-12-2012, 19:21
Yes... but if the countries were invaded in the first place, then how exactly is that worth the paper it's printed on?
Because the de facto government agreed with it, regardless of your opinion. :shrug:
Tellos Athenaios
03-12-2012, 19:27
Just like I'm sure that this guy who offed 16 people got a direct order from Washington to do so.
Yeah, well haven't seen them actually bothering to try and prosecute the Afghan cops. I'm not Mitt Romney, but I think this is a safe bet: the USA does have a government which is able to enforce its laws on its own even when they're widely unpopular, and Afghanistan doesn't. So if you make an agreement with a government that doesn't actually have the means to reign in the populace then that agreement isn't worth very much.
I haven't seen the American soldiers walk around freely in Afghan villages or cities, safe in the knowledge that the Afghan government runs a functioning law and order department. By contrast, as I recall, the Afghan government relies on the USA to be its enforcer.
rory_20_uk
03-12-2012, 19:29
So... it's a good enough government when it comes to being able to state foreign troops are OK to be stationed there - but not good enough to enforce law and order or other things that are what makes a government. I think that is called having one's cake and eating it.
~:smoking:
So if you make an agreement with a government that doesn't actually have the means to reign in the populace then that agreement isn't worth very much.
It's worth whatever you can get out of it. For us it means that *our* soldiers will be prosecuted by *our* military tribunals. That's all that matters.
Strawman!
Oh really?
Completely different scenarios. Bin Laden is an established enemy of the country engaged in armed resistance and attempting to kill us with his legions of men and resources. This guy is one single man.
:laugh4:
Bin Laden isn't the Taliban, or wasn't. Bin Laden was the head of a terrorist/criminal group, it's like saying the mafia in New York are an established enemy of the country and then firing away at them with drones.
Flying airplanes into a building and going to a village and shooting 14 people are both acts of terrorism and mass murder. By your standard the soldier is an enemy of the afghan state and they should just blow up his prison and say the guards are collateral damage.
More importantly this man turned himself in and surrendered willingly. Bin Laden died in combat. Do you think we should shoot him in the head now to make it more comparable to Bin Laden?
Oh yes, surrendering surely makes it better. I don't see why you should try to make it more comparable to Bin Laden?
I didn't see you complaining when the norwegian shooter was taken into custody? Is that man due a fair trial?
Then why isnt this man?
He surely is, I just liked the hypocrisy concerning Bin Laden, if it's an afghan who is the criminal he is demonized and shot without trial, but if the criminal is an american then he deserves a fair trial.
Don't the people in gitmo deserve a fair trial? What about the people who were abducted and sent to secret CIA torture camps? Didn't they deserve a fair trial? Or does that depend on the passport one owns?
I didn't see you argue loudly that the people sent to gitmo would deserve a fair trial, why now?
Please bring something more substantial to the table next time.
Please try to apply a universal standard next time.
Tellos Athenaios
03-12-2012, 20:01
So... it's a good enough government when it comes to being able to state foreign troops are OK to be stationed there - but not good enough to enforce law and order or other things that are what makes a government. I think that is called having one's cake and eating it.
~:smoking: Yes, and I think that is exactly what the Karzai government has been trying to do. To sit on the throne an extract revenue whilst using the Americans to legitimise their rule, instead of doing it by themselves with American aid.
It's worth whatever you can get out of it. For us it means that *our* soldiers will be prosecuted by *our* military tribunals. That's all that matters.
Oh I don't disagree there. But the line of reasoning which you use to arrive at the conclusion is still wrong, and crucially you don't know what you'll get until you have it. That is to say, if the Taliban successfully blow up the guy (along with how many innocents) with an IED then you're not actually going to get much out of it after all; which is something to keep in mind. The Taliban or for that matter the Afghans don't necessarily feel equally bound to honour any obligations Karzai might have incurred.
Oh I don't disagree there. But the line of reasoning which you use to arrive at the conclusion is still wrong, and crucially you don't know what you'll get until you have it. That is to say, if the Taliban successfully blow up the guy (along with how many innocents) with an IED then you're not actually going to get much out of it after all; which is something to keep in mind. The Taliban or for that matter the Afghans don't necessarily feel equally bound to honour any obligations Karzai might have incurred.
If the fact that not everyone follows government regulations is a sufficient reason to de-legitimize a government, then there are no legitimate governments in the world. No government has a 100% compliance rate.
Papewaio
03-12-2012, 21:50
On the surface sounds like he had a mental breakdown.
An investigation should make sure there wasn't other reasons like an affair or pregnancy.
What ever happened to that squad in Iraq that raped the girl then murdered her and her family?
Papewaio
03-12-2012, 22:11
No I just believe in fair and western justice. He WILL die if found guilty by the military. And he will receive a FAIR trial. If he is tried by the barbarians he will not receive a fair trial and he will die all the same albeit in a more gruesome manner which is completely irrelevant.
Bin Laden? Oops shoulder cam failed, "watch out that wild animal is charging" bang, shoulder cam back on "He went for his gun, honest guv"
My Lai, one of several apparently, at least 347 killed by US troops (500+ according to the locals). One guy paroled for 3 and a half years. 25 other soldiers let go because they had left the service.
Gitmo, nuff said.
We ain't exactly above looking after our own and giving payback to those that have crossed us. Totally natural and understandable, just not a 100% case of we are the just and free.
Blessing in disguise. Lets leave.
Preferring death to tyranny is a quaint idea that a lot of Americans might hold dear (especially macho chest pounding/hawkish types), but its not something we can or should decide on behalf of an entire country, with a completely alien culture, without asking them. Most of them would rather have their whole family alive under theocratic rule than half of it wiped out with a corrupt joke of a "democracy" in place. Just leave them alone.
The "war on terror" would have gone much better being fought just with beefed up FBI (who has done much more to protect Americans since 9/11 than the military has breeding a generation of terrorists) and CIA, not M1A2 Abrams with TUSK kits and AC-130 Spectre gunships.
Papewaio
03-13-2012, 05:08
I think Rory is stating that a sczhoid break would have this sudden and deadly onset that no amount of Pre pep talks could have prevented.
People and systems fail. If he was mentally ill than deal with him compassionately if he was of sound mind then throw the book at him.
Sasaki Kojiro
03-13-2012, 05:16
Article I read said that he had suffered a traumatic brain injury in a vehicle accident, was on his 4th deployment, and had marital problems.
PanzerJaeger
03-13-2012, 06:02
In my opinion, the people calling for this soldier's head are being extremely short-sighted. From what we have learned about him thus far, it appears that he is just as much of a victim as the Afghans he killed. This was an organizational failure, and emblematic of a military force pushed to its limits after a decade of constant warfare with no clear goals and no discernible way to measure progress. There is absolutely no reason a soldier who has suffered a traumatic brain injury should be on his fourth tour in a combat zone, and yet the Army had to scrape the bottom of the barrel to come up with the troop numbers needed for the surge. Assuming that this was a mental breakdown, this soldier - who has been serving continuously in Afghanistan for nearly a decade - deserves to live the rest of his life in a mental institution, not an Afghan prison. I sincerely hope he is not executed in the name of US-Afghani relations.
Centurion1
03-13-2012, 06:05
traumatic brain injuries are a very serious business.
they are new to this war because of the nature of things like ieds with such large bomb radii. They slam the soldiers brain around and mix up the circuitry often while leaving the man who suffers the injury seemingly unharmed. This has been a real issue that the army has been trying to adjust too.
If it results in things like this dear god those poor men.
As I see it this is just going to push Iraq and Afghanistan vets even farther down the road of being treated like those of Vietnam. Shunned and looked down upon and now we can add the general public thinking they are all about to go Rambo on everyone.
And then the sadness of one man serving !4! tours of duty! And there are plenty like that even among reserves and national guard. People want less money for the services while we are STILL fighting a war and it results in more men dying and being destroyed by the rigors and horror of war with nary a break in between.
I suspect this soldier who was a relatively senior NCO probably had something knocked loose and that finally manifested itself with this killing spree.
Major Robert Dump
03-13-2012, 07:29
Before eevryone goes defending him about his 4 deployments we may step back, take a deep breath and consider a few things:
- He may have volunteered for additional deployments prior to his in-between grace period. Some of us do back to back deployments. It is very stressful, but the army doesnt deserve the blame for something I did.
- 4 deployments (if you factor in the grace period) covers well over the time frame of two four-year enlistments, which means that this guy has re-enlisted, maybe even done it twice.
- 4 deployments makes it fairly safe to assume one has marriage problems. His kids are likley headcases as well
Stress, mental disorder, none of this changes my opinion. I still call for his head.
The guys who raped the little girl and killed her family in Iraq did not recieve the death penalty, and a couple of the got off pretty easy while the other few got life, and their action even resulted in the direct retaliot attack at a checkpoin in which 5 soldiers were killed, 12 injured and 2 abducted and later killed.. The kill squad in Afghanistan who killed men in front of their families then posed with their bodies got long prison sentences, and their actions resulted in soldiers being killed in retaliation. The Taliban and HAqqani are not the only ones with access to RPGs and IEDs: Afghans communicate through violence, and when there is a surge of IED activity in an area it can often be attributed to locals (teachers, farmers, random joe) planting the IEDs because they want something or don't want something. The IED activity in the provinces where the kill team operated got so bad the convoys stopped. Way to take ten steps backwards, yay!
I have no reason to believe that this guy will get death. If we want to talk international politics and the worlkds perception of america, executing our soldiers who did bad things would work wonders. If it were up to me I would have been executing soldiers in some of the more brutal rape cases in south korea.
From me to you guys, from people who have to deal with the fallout of this on a daily basis, I can assure y0ou wholeheartedly that the average military member wants this guy hung out to dry, shot in the face, and brushed under the rug. We are tired of this war not making progress, we are tired of the stupid politics, we are tired of being hamstrung by a corrput government who siphons all of our aid (employments in direct support of bases provides far more jobs than the "aid" money given to Karzai, and these jobs incidentally don't figure into the foreign aid package as they are considered a military expenditure, just like FOO money and CERP money -- this is cooking the books, so to speak), and we are tied of paying afghans $6500 for a set of sidewalk stairs and $40,000 for a plywood B-hut, while meanwhile our families back home are unemployed and our election boils down to the old Abortion/Religion/Foreign Oil/Gas Prices debate. You want resluts in Afghanistan? Stop protecting troops who do bad things, as it only breeds more insurgents
And yes, the afghans do not typically prosecute their american killing cops and soldiers because those guys end up dead or whished away to an american detention facility. However, I will point out there is a huge difference between a cop killing a soldier of an occupying force and a soldier of an occupying force committing premeditated killing of civilians.
Kill him. Please.
Sasaki Kojiro
03-13-2012, 07:35
A sudden and deadly onset? He snuck out of the post and assassinated people in cold blood. This was not a crime of passion, nor something that was unpreventable. The blame is with the shooter.
Exactly...He killed some people, and then walked nearly a mile to another village and killed some more.
PanzerJaeger
03-13-2012, 08:14
TBI does not cause people to sneak out and assassinate two households full of people. That is insulting to people who actually have TBI and actually suffer real symptoms of TBI.
You cannot say that with any certainty whatsoever. TBI, especially long term cases, can cause all sorts of cognitive changes, especially in one's ability to discern between right and wrong, process emotions, and act rationally. Those symptoms can manifest slowly or rather suddenly. Again, it is way too early to blame this wholly or partially on the condition, but it is exactly the kind of thing that would make a seemingly normal, long-time combat veteran sneak out of his base and kill a bunch of strangers. As has already been said, it is highly doubtful that this man joined the Army, worked his way up to staff seargent, and served four tours with the intention of killing 16 Afghanis on his fourth. Something snapped.
Why is everyone trying to make excuses for this dude?
I can only speak for myself, but I am not trying to make excuses. He killed 16 innocent people and his life is effectively and rightly over for all intents and purposes. I am interested in understanding why this happened. There are a lot of pieces to this puzzle yet to be uncovered, but the picture that has emerged so far is certainly not black and white. There is little that can be gained from writing him off as an evil killer and hanging him.
MRD,
As you surely know, re-enlistments are more than often the result of economic necessity. Is it not the Army's responsibility to screen such folks? (And in fact, I know that they do to a certain extent.) This guy seems to have had more red flags than should be acceptable.
Also, it makes perfect sense that those most angered by this guys actions would be his fellow soldiers. He has set their cause back in countless ways. However, that should not be the standard used to judge his actions.
CountArach
03-13-2012, 08:50
In my opinion, the people calling for this soldier's head are being extremely short-sighted. From what we have learned about him thus far, it appears that he is just as much of a victim as the Afghans he killed.
That a bit of an over-exaggeration.
People want less money for the services while we are STILL fighting a war and it results in more men dying and being destroyed by the rigors and horror of war with nary a break in between.
What has funding got to do with this? Don't tell me there weren't people who had done fewer than 3 tours already who were willing to go out there. This isn't a funding issue.
rory_20_uk
03-13-2012, 10:13
If the man was a schizophrenic then he should be sent to a mental health institution for the safety of himself and others for the rest of his life. There is no cure, he's already proven incredibly dangerous, and schizophrenics tend to relapse in a bad way as soon as they stop taking their meds. So, if you're saying he deserves to be put under constant care and supervision for the rest of his life then I agree--but if he's not crazy at all then all you're doing is insulting millions of schizophrenics by putting this guy in their camp.
I was postulating to a cause. I am not a psychiatrist, nor have I interviewed the person.
I think Rory is stating that a sczhoid break would have this sudden and deadly onset that no amount of Pre pep talks could have prevented.
Exactly.
TBI does not cause people to sneak out and assassinate two households full of people. That is insulting to people who actually have TBI and actually suffer real symptoms of TBI.
Why is everyone trying to make excuses for this dude?
A sudden and deadly onset? He snuck out of the post and assassinated people in cold blood. This was not a crime of passion, nor something that was unpreventable. The blame is with the shooter.
Oh, you're an expert in psychiatry now? Amazing how the more ignorant one is the more one can talk with confidence.
And for the record, I am looking for a reason, not an excuse. As far as I am concerned if he did this of sound mind he should be executed, and if he is this mentally ill... he should be executed.
~:smoking:
Geez, I learned from any other murder threads that people shouldn't talk so much about the murderer and how bad his childhood was and care more about the 16 victims he killed and their families' need for justice to be served.
Why should tax payers pay for the mental facility costs for a guy who is essentially broken anyway? Death penalty is the cheaper and more humane option. :rolleyes:
Centurion1
03-13-2012, 21:44
TBI does not cause people to sneak out and assassinate two households full of people. That is insulting to people who actually have TBI and actually suffer real symptoms of TBI.
Why is everyone trying to make excuses for this dude?
A sudden and deadly onset? He snuck out of the post and assassinated people in cold blood. This was not a crime of passion, nor something that was unpreventable. The blame is with the shooter.
You have no idea what the effects of TBI are. I don't know why your posturing as some sort of know all about TBI.
Schizophrenia can manifest itself suddenly and without warning in an adults life. Often environmental concerns exacerbate this. You will notice that schizophrenic children are an aberration. So no it isnt a stretch that with all of the pressure on him his schizophrenia suddenly decided to manifest itself.
As for TBI, are you kidding me? You know all the effects of TBI? Better publish your findings because most professionals in your field still don't know all the effects. Some people have short term memory loss, others become nearly useless to society, some have motor problems. It's really that unimaginable that those huge blasts could rattle something loose int he brain that results in an atrocity like this?
A sudden and deadly onset? He snuck out of the post and assassinated people in cold blood. This was not a crime of passion, nor something that was unpreventable. The blame is with the shooter.
The blame always lies with the shooter no one is denying that. However, the crime is so heinous and doesnt make enough sense that SOMETHING had to be seriously wrong with this individual. If he had only killed full grown men I would be more easily able to understand his actions. However, he killed women and children which makes it much more bizarre.
Anyways, my views lie along with PJ's. I don't give a damn what happens to him live or die as long as he sees a just punishment for his crime. What I really care about is WHY it happened and what we can do to safeguard against it. I will rest far easier if it was something like psychosis because it will have been an oddity rather thn something that could become more common.
What has funding got to do with this? Don't tell me there weren't people who had done fewer than 3 tours already who were willing to go out there. This isn't a funding issue.
Oh it is to an extent. There isn't enough money to go around so there are increasingly less men and women serving which means that there are more tours per head. Simply because some men would be WILLING to do uncountable tours doesn't mean they should be. The four tours this guy did isn't an unheard of number to begin with. Also the government is leaning far too heavily upon reserve and guard elements with those guys shipping out far too regularly. They conduct commendable service on their tours but to be shipping out this often is not in their job description.
a completely inoffensive name
03-13-2012, 22:20
In this thread:
The murderer is the victim, and this is coming from.....PJ of all people.
and
Everyone who has actually been in the US military and dealt with buddies who have suffered from the war are ignored and called ignorant by armchair generals/psychiatrists.
Centurion1
03-13-2012, 22:52
In this thread:
The murderer is the victim, and this is coming from.....PJ of all people.
and
Everyone who has actually been in the US military and dealt with buddies who have suffered from the war are ignored and called ignorant by armchair generals/psychiatrists.
You think I haven't dealt with buddies and family that have suffered or even died in war ACIN? Alot of people on this site have been in the military who do not necessarily talk about it and plenty more know loved ones and friends who have suffered in combat. Regardless, as we all know anecdotes are worthless on the internet so lets stick to facts and verifiable information.
Just because GC was in the Army and served does not mean he is the be all end all when it comes to the effects of TBI. My cousin "has" a mild form of TBI and now he has migraines. I place the "has" in parentheses because we assume its from an IED blast he got while he was overseas since he never got them until after that. It has varying degrees of severity and what precisely it can result in is a pretty broad category.
And as I said in the very first page. I am not excusing this mans actions. As I said I expect him to get the death penalty and will consider anything less than that a travesty of justice. However, I would like to know why and what caused this man to do this because as others have said I find it hard to believe he served for ten years and went on four different tours all for the express purpose of killing some afghan civilians on his fourth tour.
tibilicus
03-14-2012, 01:37
In this thread:
The murderer is the victim, and this is coming from.....PJ of all people.
and
Everyone who has actually been in the US military and dealt with buddies who have suffered from the war are ignored and called ignorant by armchair generals/psychiatrists.
This. Whack me over the head ACIN till something comes loose, give me a gun, let me kill 16 people and then make me out as the victim. You guys are seriously defying logic here, even if he was clinically insane, of which the evidence does not suggest he still murdered, in cold blood 16 people. He coldly calculated this and made the active choice to leave the base and carry out these actions. It's sad really, I think half of you are defending him just because he's a guy in uniform. If you stopped defending your nut cases who knows you might have a better military, one which has a better reputation. Maybe then this war would be going better and 6 guys from 3 Yorks on our side wouldn't have got killed this week because the sheer animosity for your actions and by extension our actions wouldn't be as god damn high as it is now. get some perspective for Christ sake guys..
If you stopped defending your nut cases who knows you might have a better military, one which has a better reputation. Maybe then this war would be going better and 6 guys from 3 Yorks on our side wouldn't have got killed this week because the sheer animosity for your actions and by extension our actions wouldn't be as god damn high as it is now. get some perspective for Christ sake guys..
We can't change the past. You are assuming that if we behaved impeccably 100% of the time the locals would somehow appreciate it and treat us differently. I believe you are mistaken: they'd still hate our guts and backstab us whenever possible. Keep in mind that no matter how nice you try to play, to them you are still an infidel, i.e. subhuman. As far as they are concerned, any evil that they might inflict on you is morally okay.
tibilicus
03-14-2012, 02:10
We can't change the past. You are assuming that if we behaved impeccably 100% of the time the locals would somehow appreciate it and treat us differently. I believe you are mistaken: they'd still hate our guts and backstab us whenever possible. Keep in mind that no matter how nice you try to play, to them you are still an infidel, i.e. subhuman. As far as they are concerned, any evil that they might inflict on you is morally okay.
The road may be bumpy but there's things which could be done to make the ride smoother. the Last month or so has done nothing of the sort however.
Centurion1
03-14-2012, 02:40
This. Whack me over the head ACIN till something comes loose, give me a gun, let me kill 16 people and then make me out as the victim. You guys are seriously defying logic here, even if he was clinically insane, of which the evidence does not suggest he still murdered, in cold blood 16 people. He coldly calculated this and made the active choice to leave the base and carry out these actions. It's sad really, I think half of you are defending him just because he's a guy in uniform. If you stopped defending your nut cases who knows you might have a better military, one which has a better reputation. Maybe then this war would be going better and 6 guys from 3 Yorks on our side wouldn't have got killed this week because the sheer animosity for your actions and by extension our actions wouldn't be as god damn high as it is now. get some perspective for Christ sake guys..
Oh my God I am so sick of this European crap. You act like your some sort of enlightened race. Then why the hell do you people constantly engage in these **** measuring contests about how superior your armed forces are. Guess what, regardless of your "super training" your militaries aren't as powerful, give it up. You couldn't even conduct an air campaign without our JDAMs.
If you stopped defending your nut cases who knows you might have a better military, one which has a better reputation. Maybe then this war would be going better and 6 guys from 3 Yorks on our side wouldn't have got killed this week because the sheer animosity for your actions and by extension our actions wouldn't be as god damn high as it is now. get some perspective for Christ sake guys..
You want to throw around insulting swill like this boyo? You think your military has been behaving any better? Your laughable, remember a little incident with a man named Baha Mousa? What happened to those involved again?
Guess what of all your men investigated for Baha Mousa were cleared with a couple getting slaps on the wrist.
Go hide your own bloody rag before you point at ours.
And as I said in the very first page. I am not excusing this mans actions. As I said I expect him to get the death penalty and will consider anything less than that a travesty of justice.
What I really care about is WHY it happened and what we can do to safeguard against it. I will rest far easier if it was something like psychosis because it will have been an oddity rather thn something that could become more common.
Read from now on.
Major Robert Dump
03-14-2012, 06:31
This was a highly pre-meditated act.
Some of you forget that things like this happen in the civilian world all the time, as some people are simply sociopaths, some are delusional, some are evil, and some simply get drunk and do jacked up stuff, and they do not have the luxury of blaming combat stress and IEDs.
I should also point out that the amount of counseling shoved down our throats regarding injuries, mental conditions and hurt feelings is enough to make me want to kill myself during the 80th suicide brief I had this year. As GC said, the help is there, and there is no stigma to using it anymore, in fact, the VA and our command cells actively EXPECT us to use it, and everytime something bad happens to me or my friends I am flooded with chaplains and commanders trying to talk about my feelings. If this guy went crazy -- which I highly doubt -- then his entire chain of command failed for not catching it.
It happens, but not like this. A more typical result is that he hurts himself.
People with TBI and PTSD have done some pretty wierd things, some of them worse than others, and virtually all of them had some sort of catalyst and lead-up, a burning fuse if you will.
What none of them had in common was a guy who had to virtually SNEAK or BS his way out of a FOB that is on 100% lockdown, SNEAK a mile into a sleeping community, and then go house to house killing people.
In fact, why didn;'t he just wait for a patrol or mission and do it then? Was he expecting to be SNEAKY and get away with it? Did he not want to be gunned down by his fellow soldiers? Or maybe he is a FOBBIT and his combat stress amounts to Outlook problems and by god he just couldnt take it anymore. sounds like he put some thought into it. Wow, not very PTSD-ey or TBI-ey of him, planning it and all....
I seem to recall 2 NavyPRT enlisted who stole a State Department Vehicle in 2010, scored some hooch, and decided to drivedrunk outside of Kabul and go looking for brothels and try to fight the Taliban all by themselves. Wow, what a crazy stupid thing to do. Those guys must have had TBI...... oh you guys didn't know they were drunk? Well, the government doesn't always tell us everything because they don't want to ruin the image we have of our soldiers, of whom the public incidentally has a far mroe wholesome view of than the soldiers do of each other
You need to chill out Centurion and take it easy on GC.
CountArach
03-14-2012, 08:39
Please remain civilised, there is some good discussion in this thread and I don't want to lock it
Sarmatian
03-14-2012, 09:24
This. Whack me over the head ACIN till something comes loose, give me a gun, let me kill 16 people and then make me out as the victim. You guys are seriously defying logic here, even if he was clinically insane, of which the evidence does not suggest he still murdered, in cold blood 16 people. He coldly calculated this and made the active choice to leave the base and carry out these actions. It's sad really, I think half of you are defending him just because he's a guy in uniform. If you stopped defending your nut cases who knows you might have a better military, one which has a better reputation. Maybe then this war would be going better and 6 guys from 3 Yorks on our side wouldn't have got killed this week because the sheer animosity for your actions and by extension our actions wouldn't be as god damn high as it is now. get some perspective for Christ sake guys..
There is just one problem with this theory. If this
he was clinically insane is true then this
murdered, in cold blood 16 people. He coldly calculated this and made the active choice to leave the base and carry out these actions.
doesn't make any sense.
I'm not trying to defend the guy, but only way I see him killing 16 civilians with a healthy mind is if it was a misguided sense of revenge (Afghans killed my buddies!) or deep hatred/racism (they don't deserve to live!).
Any other explanation revolves around him having psychological issues.
I understand GC's position - he's there, working his ass off and risking his life to win hearts and mind of those people and then one man does something like this and resets everything.
On the other hand, I have really little faith in American justice system in cases like this. I'm willing to bet that this guy either way won't get the chair or life in prison. 20 euros! Any takers?
Major Robert Dump
03-14-2012, 09:42
He won't get the death penalty. We are harder on 4th-tier terrorists who entrap with dumb plots that never had a chance of working to begin with, than we are on soldiers who completely abandoned the militry values and set the mission back years, negating all progress and sacrifice that was made by others.
Do you know what commanding officers during the civil war did to soldiers who were caught raping locals when the army looted the town for food? They hung them on the spot. I want those days back.
gaelic cowboy
03-14-2012, 10:40
He won't get the death penalty. We are harder on 4th-tier terrorists who entrap with dumb plots that never had a chance of working to begin with, than we are on soldiers who completely abandoned the militry values and set the mission back years, negating all progress and sacrifice that was made by others.
Do you know what commanding officers during the civil war did to soldiers who were caught raping locals when the army looted the town for food? They hung them on the spot. I want those days back.
Does America allow extradition to countries with the death penalty, I expect the Afghans will want him to appear before whatever kinds of courts the have after he faces the American ones.
Sarmatian
03-14-2012, 10:45
Does America allow extradition to countries with the death penalty, I expect the Afghans will want him to appear before whatever kinds of courts the have after he faces the American ones.
Nope, America doesn't allow extradition of its citizens and in cases like Afghanistan, I'm guessing that exterritoriality for Americans in Afghanistan was one of the first documents Karzai had to sign.
tibilicus
03-14-2012, 12:45
Oh my God I am so sick of this European crap. You act like your some sort of enlightened race. Then why the hell do you people constantly engage in these **** measuring contests about how superior your armed forces are. Guess what, regardless of your "super training" your militaries aren't as powerful, give it up. You couldn't even conduct an air campaign without our JDAMs.
You want to throw around insulting swill like this boyo? You think your military has been behaving any better? Your laughable, remember a little incident with a man named Baha Mousa? What happened to those involved again?
Guess what of all your men investigated for Baha Mousa were cleared with a couple getting slaps on the wrist.
Go hide your own bloody rag before you point at ours.
Read from now on.
Don't act like a whiny child. Yes we've had our problems but why do you think the number of detestable incidents involving our troops is significantly less than those involving your troops? Even then I don't defend the actions of murderers, unlike you, falling hand over foot trying to defend this guy who murdered 16 people.
And yes, we aren't as powerful as you, I didn't ask to get into a manhood measuring contest, you spend vast amounts of money on your military, money us "lesser" powers don't have. I like your attitude though, I guess you don't need our support in these wars though. Maybe you should go back to funding US sponsored terrorism the UK had to fight on its own soil for 30 years.. You only stopped doing that when you needed our help didn't you?
gaelic cowboy
03-14-2012, 13:49
Don't act like a whiny child. Yes we've had our problems but why do you think the number of detestable incidents involving our troops is significantly less than those involving your troops? Even then I don't defend the actions of murderers, unlike you, falling hand over foot trying to defend this guy who murdered 16 people.
And yes, we aren't as powerful as you, I didn't ask to get into a manhood measuring contest, you spend vast amounts of money on your military, money us "lesser" powers don't have. I like your attitude though, I guess you don't need our support in these wars though. Maybe you should go back to funding US sponsored terrorism the UK had to fight on its own soil for 30 years.. You only stopped doing that when you needed our help didn't you?
:dizzy2:
British governments have been funding and allowing state sanctioned barbarism for centuries there is none of us thats white knights.
And for the last time the IRA funds itself privately through bank robberies, protection rackets, tiger kidnapping, taxing organised crime and smuggling any private fundraising in the US was never that big.
The country most at risk from the Provisionals was and is always my own country.
tibilicus
03-14-2012, 14:23
:dizzy2:
British governments have been funding and allowing state sanctioned barbarism for centuries there is none of us thats white knights.
And for the last time the IRA funds itself privately through bank robberies, protection rackets, tiger kidnapping, taxing organised crime and smuggling any private fundraising in the US was never that big.
The country most at risk from the Provisionals was and is always my own country.
Yes, our country has acted badly, but in the modern period we never funded terrorists which damaged our "allies". It's the double standards I have a problem with. I expected no better from Gadaffi's Libya but the point is a mere 2 years after the US government essentially stopped endorsing the IRA, they expected our help in fighting there own terrorist security threat. And yes, they did have sanctioned US government support. By giving visas to known IRA members, arguing openly that the "armed struggle" was part of the "liberation" of Northern Ireland and the various actions of US congressmen who gave moeny both directly and indirectly to arm the provos.
Yet 2 years after the Good Friday Agreement we were unilaterally brought into the war on "terror", in response to a terrorist atrocity. I have a problem with this US sponsored terrorism and the fact successive UK governments have chained our foreign policy to the USA's despite they funded terrorist organisations who killed and murdered UK troops and funded a bloody conflict on our own soil. What makes the IRA claim to Northern Ireland a more legitimate cause than Bin Laden's desire to impose Islamic law in an Islamic region and remove all US presence from the Middle East? I say this not because I support Al-Qaeda, but because i deplore terrorism in all forms. Unlike certain elements of the US establishment.
Yet 2 years after the Good Friday Agreement we were unilaterally brought into the war on "terror", in response to a terrorist atrocity. I have a problem with this US sponsored terrorism and the fact successive UK governments have chained our foreign policy to the USA's despite they funded terrorist organisations who killed and murdered UK troops and funded a bloody conflict on our own soil.
Can you be more specific about the sources of aforementioned funding and their relation to Uncle Sam?
Vladimir
03-14-2012, 14:37
Can you be more specific about the sources of aforementioned funding and their relation to Uncle Sam?
It's the same people at CIA that sold crack to black people in Los Angeles. In fact, part of the proceeds were used to finance these attacks.
tibilicus
03-14-2012, 14:49
Can you be more specific about the sources of aforementioned funding and their relation to Uncle Sam?
Peter King, just one such lawmaker who was never brought to justice for his role in arming a group which killed hundreds of British and Irish.
http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/01/peter-king-terrorism-problem
Clinton by granting visas to Sinn Feinn members who had connections with and actively supported the PIRA gave them a platform of legitimization which provided further endorsement for their cause which legitimized groups such NORAID, a group which gave more money and arms to the PIRA than Libya itself. Imagine giving a platform to radical Islamist politicians (i.e the Taliban) who supported Al-Qaeda and then see why I see double standards.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/adams-is-allowed-48hour-us-visa-clinton-agrees-visit-despite-dispute-1410627.html
Peter King, just one such lawmaker who was never brought to justice for his role in arming a group which killed hundreds of British and Irish.
http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/01/peter-king-terrorism-problem
Clinton by granting visas to Sinn Feinn members who had connections with and actively supported the PIRA gave them a platform of legitimization which provided further endorsement for their cause which legitimized groups such NORAID, a group which gave more money and arms to the PIRA than Libya itself. Imagine giving a platform to radical Islamist politicians (i.e the Taliban) who supported Al-Qaeda and then see why I see double standards.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/adams-is-allowed-48hour-us-visa-clinton-agrees-visit-despite-dispute-1410627.html
Interesting... a quick look at wiki puts the claim of NORA being the front for PIRA as questionable at best. You're besmirching the name of American government because one congressmen supports a non-profit organization that *might* have been linked to PIRA, even though in its mission statement it clearly disavows violence.
As for Clinton and Sinn Fein, Sinn Fein has been a political movement while IRA did the dirty work. We support PLO but consider Al Aqsa Martyrs brigade to be terrorists, same deal here.
gaelic cowboy
03-14-2012, 15:31
Yes, our country has acted badly, but in the modern period we never funded terrorists which damaged our "allies". It's the double standards I have a problem with. I expected no better from Gadaffi's Libya but the point is a mere 2 years after the US government essentially stopped endorsing the IRA, they expected our help in fighting there own terrorist security threat. And yes, they did have sanctioned US government support. By giving visas to known IRA members, arguing openly that the "armed struggle" was part of the "liberation" of Northern Ireland and the various actions of US congressmen who gave moeny both directly and indirectly to arm the provos.
Thats pure rubbish no american government not even Kennedy's one ever supported any IRA campaigns, if members of congress spoke some words out of the side of there mouth for electoral reasons then they were more than willing to ignore them once inside the corridors of power.
Lets remember though that plenty UK politicians are more than capable of doing the same pronouncements out of the sides of there mouths too.
Also I think you will find visas were only given to known IRA members AFTER the peace process had started as part of the process(no doubt they were talked to on the sidelines over there on there intentions).
Yet 2 years after the Good Friday Agreement we were unilaterally brought into the war on "terror", in response to a terrorist atrocity.
I suppose you could say governments and people just couldnt see how you could ever talk with Bin Laden he was quite clearly a looper.
I have a problem with this US sponsored terrorism and the fact successive UK governments have chained our foreign policy to the USA's despite they funded terrorist organisations who killed and murdered UK troops and funded a bloody conflict on our own soil.
Not one US government ever funded terrorism in the North not one however US governments I will grant you they have funded terror elsewhere. Also if US private citizens gave money thats a far different kettle of fish and seeing as plenty UK citzens give and have given money for terrorism I see little difference.
What makes the IRA claim to Northern Ireland a more legitimate cause than Bin Laden's desire to impose Islamic law in an Islamic region and remove all US presence from the Middle East? I say this not because I support Al-Qaeda, but because i deplore terrorism in all forms. Unlike certain elements of the US establishment.
Strictly speaking there is no difference, but it's like anything else in life you will just know it when you see it.
It's easy to understand the IRA though there are ordinary people up and down the North who support them, and crucially there never going to just go away enough they can be ignored.
Terrorism has being used as a tool by government for centuries we shouldnt be surprised about it, but I can say with all honesty that IRA campaigns were never funded or helped by American governments.
gaelic cowboy
03-14-2012, 15:43
Peter King, just one such lawmaker who was never brought to justice for his role in arming a group which killed hundreds of British and Irish.
http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/01/peter-king-terrorism-problem
Clinton by granting visas to Sinn Feinn members who had connections with and actively supported the PIRA gave them a platform of legitimization which provided further endorsement for their cause which legitimized groups such NORAID, a group which gave more money and arms to the PIRA than Libya itself. Imagine giving a platform to radical Islamist politicians (i.e the Taliban) who supported Al-Qaeda and then see why I see double standards.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/adams-is-allowed-48hour-us-visa-clinton-agrees-visit-despite-dispute-1410627.html
It's also worth remebering that the Americans would have had members of congress and it's security establishment engage in contact with the IRA in order that if they did somehow drive the British out they would not end up in the soviet camp.
A soviet satelite in the Atlantic could not be allowed ever as it would give soviet subs an ice free, blue water harbours less than a hours flight from London.
It would have destabilised the NATO plans which no doubt were based on complete control of sea access to the UK.
So yes some shadowy evil :daisy: in the CIA prob sat down and wargammed IRA senarios on what might happen, and sometimes they might even have engaged in a bit of double dealing.
It's a stretch however to say there was ever full or real governmental support, it's like saying the UK governments supported IRA terror on themselves because all the spies in it's ranks who continued to engage in terror activities to maintian cover.
And I already explained the visa situation with regard to Gerry Adams, that visa was acknowledged as really driving the agreement forward. (afterwards of course) I understand you dislike having to treat with Gerry Adams but thats the game and you know that yourself.
Kagemusha
03-14-2012, 17:13
Because I know that if I were a relative, I would aim for the stomach or nads. You shouldn't have that much passion being involved with an execution.
Professional firing squad, aiming for the head would do just fine. Of all the ways one can be executed, I think I would find that the easiest and least humiliating.
Firing squads are not aiming for the head, but chest.
Major Robert Dump
03-14-2012, 18:36
Maybe in addition to TBI, this soldier who kept volunteering for deployments was also sold crack by the CIA. And here I didn't even realize he was black.
Firing squads are not aiming for the head, but chest.
So? I am saying they should aim for the head. If a guy cannot hit the head at that range, he should not be on a firing squad.
So? I am saying they should aim for the head.
Why?
Why?
You wouldn't rather be shot in the head? Several .30 cals in the head is an instant death. If they are in the chest, you may still live for a while.
a completely inoffensive name
03-15-2012, 00:47
You wouldn't rather be shot in the head? Several .30 cals in the head is an instant death. If they are in the chest, you may still live for a while.Costanza.jpg
PanzerJaeger
03-15-2012, 04:53
In this thread:
The murderer is the victim, and this is coming from.....PJ of all people.
and
Everyone who has actually been in the US military and dealt with buddies who have suffered from the war are ignored and called ignorant by armchair generals/psychiatrists.
I think my 'victim' comments have been misinterpreted. They came off as way more definitive than I meant for them to be. I should have said 'he could be a victim'. Nothing is known for sure at this point. I was attempting to make a narrower point about the Army's rotation policy and the wisdom of having troops with documented brain injuries in the field.
It goes without saying that the Afghans killed were innocent victims. And indeed, this guy will rightfully pay for his crime with his life in one way or another, whether it be in a military prison or a mental facility. There really is not much more that can be said about that. The incident is an unmitigated tragedy from every angle.
My comments were not about excusing his actions, but rather establishing motivation. We cannot change what happened, but there is a possibility that we can learn lessons from it that will help prevent future tragedies. There seems to be a rush by some in this thread to dismiss this incident as the actions of one evil man. Kill him and be done with it. Nothing to see here, folks. It is much easier to take such a position as it does not require any uncomfortable retrospection or deeper critical analysis of the environment in which he operated.
That may be the truth. There are plenty of genuinely evil people out there, and alcohol can certainly turn evil thoughts into evil actions. However, from the very early information that has come out about the man, the situation seems much more murky. This man served four tours in Afghanistan, apparently without incident. I'm just not ready to write him off as evil. I want to know why this behavior manifested itself at this late date. What triggered it? And yes, what part, if any, did his TBI or any other mental condition play in it, and how much did the Army know about his condition? There's no armchair psychology going on here. I simply stated the symptoms of TBI, which do not appear to preclude this kind of activity. At this point, everything is speculation, but those claiming that TBI absolutely could not have had any impact on this situation have no medical basis for their certainty.
The interest in TBI has nothing to do with finding an excuse. It is about preventing future incidents. How many more troops with documented TBI are in their fourth tours in combat areas? Should Army guidelines surrounding who is allowed to reenlist be reassessed? Are the myriad of mental health initiatives the Army has taken truly effective, or just wastes of time as those in this thread have insinuated? I do not have any answers, but I do not think such questions should be dismissed outright.
Yes we've had our problems but why do you think the number of detestable incidents involving our troops is significantly less than those involving your troops?
Calm down and think. How many US troops are in Afghanistan? And how many British?
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
03-15-2012, 11:51
So? I am saying they should aim for the head. If a guy cannot hit the head at that range, he should not be on a firing squad.
If you survive the firing squad the presiding officers finishes you with a pistol shot to the temple, when he feels like it.
rory_20_uk
03-16-2012, 11:44
The smearing starts: Separately, an un-named US military official told the New York Times that the suspect had simply "snapped", and confirmed that he was on his fourth combat tour. "When it all comes out, it will be a combination of stress, alcohol and domestic issues - he just snapped," the official said.
Although the soldier describes his Marriage as fantastic and had no problems with alcohol. I guess trying to angle blame away from the military who sent him back is very important at this point - better a drunk wife beater than a damaged war veteran.
~:smoking:
a completely inoffensive name
03-16-2012, 19:32
I think my 'victim' comments have been misinterpreted. They came off as way more definitive than I meant for them to be. I should have said 'he could be a victim'. Nothing is known for sure at this point. I was attempting to make a narrower point about the Army's rotation policy and the wisdom of having troops with documented brain injuries in the field.
It goes without saying that the Afghans killed were innocent victims. And indeed, this guy will rightfully pay for his crime with his life in one way or another, whether it be in a military prison or a mental facility. There really is not much more that can be said about that. The incident is an unmitigated tragedy from every angle.
My comments were not about excusing his actions, but rather establishing motivation. We cannot change what happened, but there is a possibility that we can learn lessons from it that will help prevent future tragedies. There seems to be a rush by some in this thread to dismiss this incident as the actions of one evil man. Kill him and be done with it. Nothing to see here, folks. It is much easier to take such a position as it does not require any uncomfortable retrospection or deeper critical analysis of the environment in which he operated.
That may be the truth. There are plenty of genuinely evil people out there, and alcohol can certainly turn evil thoughts into evil actions. However, from the very early information that has come out about the man, the situation seems much more murky. This man served four tours in Afghanistan, apparently without incident. I'm just not ready to write him off as evil. I want to know why this behavior manifested itself at this late date. What triggered it? And yes, what part, if any, did his TBI or any other mental condition play in it, and how much did the Army know about his condition? There's no armchair psychology going on here. I simply stated the symptoms of TBI, which do not appear to preclude this kind of activity. At this point, everything is speculation, but those claiming that TBI absolutely could not have had any impact on this situation have no medical basis for their certainty.
The interest in TBI has nothing to do with finding an excuse. It is about preventing future incidents. How many more troops with documented TBI are in their fourth tours in combat areas? Should Army guidelines surrounding who is allowed to reenlist be reassessed? Are the myriad of mental health initiatives the Army has taken truly effective, or just wastes of time as those in this thread have insinuated? I do not have any answers, but I do not think such questions should be dismissed outright.
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar?
Ironside
03-16-2012, 20:25
My comments were not about excusing his actions, but rather establishing motivation. We cannot change what happened, but there is a possibility that we can learn lessons from it that will help prevent future tragedies. There seems to be a rush by some in this thread to dismiss this incident as the actions of one evil man. Kill him and be done with it. Nothing to see here, folks. It is much easier to take such a position as it does not require any uncomfortable retrospection or deeper critical analysis of the environment in which he operated.
That's leftie thinking. ~;p
To play a little devil advocate and run with a bit pragmatism. Since you still have death penalty, I see that you still ruled out death penalty (it might simply be a minor communication miss). Anyway, when also considering the effect the punishment will have on the remaining Afghanistan mission, which punishment do you think will have the best effect for the US troops?
The smearing starts: Separately, an un-named US military official told the New York Times that the suspect had simply "snapped", and confirmed that he was on his fourth combat tour. "When it all comes out, it will be a combination of stress, alcohol and domestic issues - he just snapped," the official said.
Although the soldier describes his Marriage as fantastic and had no problems with alcohol. I guess trying to angle blame away from the military who sent him back is very important at this point - better a drunk wife beater than a damaged war veteran.
~:smoking:
Depends. For his defense it's probably better to be a damaged war veteran and trying to shift the blame away. He's horribly broken some way and certainly not happy. If it's accurate about a good marriage and no drinking, then he's been broken a long time, while his wife has kept him up.
Shaka_Khan
03-16-2012, 21:12
If you survive the firing squad the presiding officers finishes you with a pistol shot to the temple, when he feels like it.
What if you survive that?
a completely inoffensive name
03-16-2012, 21:23
What if you survive that? You are let go. No human punishment can effect superman in any way unless the bullets were made of kryptonite.
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
03-17-2012, 02:49
several in the chest and one in the head? Dude survives that its only a question of "for how long?"
Point blank, even with a 9mm? Dude survives that he's the Terminator.
What if you survive that?
You don't, unless your Vandal Savage.
Sarmatian
03-17-2012, 09:14
What if you survive that?
If you survive that, they tie you to the bed and tickle you until you die laughing.
Major Robert Dump
03-17-2012, 12:41
nothing that has come out changes any of what I said. He should still hang. Pity he has children. You think the afghans troops kill a bunch of NATO troops now? Wait until this guy gets a prison sentence like the Kill Squad ringlieader....
As long as our mission is COIN and "training and mentoring" Afghan forces we cannot let our people go ape #$%^ on civilians and get away with it, because the rest of us pay. If we want to behave and punish the guilty in this manner, then we need to kick every afghan off of every base and stop training their people and go back to Turtling like we did the first 3 years.
nothing that has come out changes any of what I said. He should still hang. Pity he has children. You think the afghans troops kill a bunch of NATO troops now? Wait until this guy gets a prison sentence like the Kill Squad ringlieader....
I agree he should be tried and put in a stockade somewhere. I still don't believe in the death penalty though.
@ Tiblicus: Wasn’t England that refused to extradite members of the Muslim Extremists (Rachid Ramda) responsible for a bombing campaign in France (1995) (Khaled Kelkal’s network) linked with the Algerian GIA?
Rachid Ramda was finally extradited after the attack on London, 10 years after, when the failure of the appeasement politic toward the Muslim Extremists clearly failed to protect UK territory…
Concerning the Staff Sergeant, he clearly lost his mind. So why should he be executed? I remind people it is about justice, not revenge or political goal.
And when another Staff Sergeant, Frank Wuterich, (in 2005, nineteen people were killed inside houses in the Iraqi town, along with five men who pulled up near the scene in a car -10 women or children killed at point-blank range- ) got three month for “dereliction of duty”…
Horrible crimes need punishment but more than that, Justice. And it can’t be acceptable to bow in front of a mob…
I don’t know what went in his mind… Nor I know what went in Calley’s in Vietnam (My Lai Massacre)… But when things go wrong but the combination of various factors (inexperience, frustration, losing friends, feeling of inadequacy, burn out, etc.), all this have to be balanced and assessed then sentenced.
I know that nowadays everything is genocide (Srebrenica) thanks to lawyers in the ITCY and war crimes.
A war crime is to pick at random a village, to round up the women and children in the church, to install a heavy machine gun in front of the door, to through incendiary grenades in it, then to shoot all the ones who try to escape, and then to kill all the men in the barns, in the houses, where they were under guards. It happened in Oradour-sur-Glane in the Haute-Vienne Department of France, on Saturday the 10th of June 1944. This atrocity was carried out by soldiers of the Der Führer Regiment of the 2nd Waffen-SS Panzer Division, Das Reich. On that day they killed a total of 642 men, women and children without giving any reasons for their actions. No reason…
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
03-18-2012, 17:27
@ Tiblicus: Wasn’t England that refused to extradite members of the Muslim Extremists (Rachid Ramda) responsible for a bombing campaign in France (1995) (Khaled Kelkal’s network) linked with the Algerian GIA?
Rachid Ramda was finally extradited after the attack on London, 10 years after, when the failure of the appeasement politic toward the Muslim Extremists clearly failed to protect UK territory…
Concerning the Staff Sergeant, he clearly lost his mind. So why should he be executed? I remind people it is about justice, not revenge or political goal.
And when another Staff Sergeant, Frank Wuterich, (in 2005, nineteen people were killed inside houses in the Iraqi town, along with five men who pulled up near the scene in a car -10 women or children killed at point-blank range- ) got three month for “dereliction of duty”…
Horrible crimes need punishment but more than that, Justice. And it can’t be acceptable to bow in front of a mob…
I don’t know what went in his mind… Nor I know what went in Calley’s in Vietnam (My Lai Massacre)… But when things go wrong but the combination of various factors (inexperience, frustration, losing friends, feeling of inadequacy, burn out, etc.), all this have to be balanced and assessed then sentenced.
I know that nowadays everything is genocide (Srebrenica) thanks to lawyers in the ITCY and war crimes.
A war crime is to pick at random a village, to round up the women and children in the church, to install a heavy machine gun in front of the door, to through incendiary grenades in it, then to shoot all the ones who try to escape, and then to kill all the men in the barns, in the houses, where they were under guards. It happened in Oradour-sur-Glane in the Haute-Vienne Department of France, on Saturday the 10th of June 1944. This atrocity was carried out by soldiers of the Der Führer Regiment of the 2nd Waffen-SS Panzer Division, Das Reich. On that day they killed a total of 642 men, women and children without giving any reasons for their actions. No reason…
Justice means the application of the Law, in thyis case if he had killed 19 civilians in the US, majority women and children, he would be executed. So he should be executed.
I see no difference between this and German massacres in WWII (or Allied massacres of German prisoners, lets not pretend now) except scale.
Now, if you dislike execution in principle, as I do, that is an entirely different argument and not pertinant.
If found guilty without doubts, if he was not suffering of a moment of mental breakdown/meltdown, yes. But if circumstantial evidences prove he was not himself that was not, in term of psychiatry, fully responsible, this have to be heard.
The law of the country have to be followed.
And I was not comparing with the murder of POW, as the people he killed were not, but civilians he killed were as the French in my example of war crime. If he planned it, then did it, it is a mass murder. But, until this is prove in front of a court, he has the right to be heard.
And yes, I am against the death penalty…
PanzerJaeger
03-18-2012, 20:41
A war crime is to pick at random a village, to round up the women and children in the church, to install a heavy machine gun in front of the door, to through incendiary grenades in it, then to shoot all the ones who try to escape, and then to kill all the men in the barns, in the houses, where they were under guards. It happened in Oradour-sur-Glane in the Haute-Vienne Department of France, on Saturday the 10th of June 1944. This atrocity was carried out by soldiers of the Der Führer Regiment of the 2nd Waffen-SS Panzer Division, Das Reich. On that day they killed a total of 642 men, women and children without giving any reasons for their actions. No reason…
There was plenty of reason from the German point of view.
Papewaio
03-18-2012, 22:10
If found guilty without doubts, if he was not suffering of a moment of mental breakdown/meltdown, yes. But if circumstantial evidences prove he was not himself that was not, in term of psychiatry, fully responsible, this have to be heard.
The law of the country have to be followed.
And I was not comparing with the murder of POW, as the people he killed were not, but civilians he killed were as the French in my example of war crime. If he planned it, then did it, it is a mass murder. But, until this is prove in front of a court, he has the right to be heard.
And yes, I am against the death penalty…
Well Calley wasn't the only one at My Lai. After all herding people into houses and then throwing in grenades. Somewhere between 350 and 500 dead... Not exactly the work of a lone individual who was having a mental breakdown. Now in wikileaks er Wikipedia it refers to several letters to senators and senior commanders that My Lai was happening monthly in some units.
So what happened to members of the unit? 25 got off because they resigned. Calley got probation.
Look at some of the incidents that happened in Iraq. Look at the helicopter gunship videos and the lengths the military went to not make it public. Look at the rape and murder cases perpetuated by teams of men. So we scorn the idea that a woman who wears a short skirt deserves to be raped, but if you are in an occupied country don't expect the same representation as an occupier. Do not expect your accused to face the same justice. Heck don't expect it if you are in Okiniawa.
Manning in the end of the day is going to get treated worse than men who have murdered women and children. So what does that say about the priority of the justice system?
“There was plenty of reason from the German point of view.” To kill people they knew had nothing to do with the on-going fight… Which one? Did it improve their speed? Or their fighting capacity?
Papewaio, I am not telling the US Martial Court is the best system. I even think that this US system of reducing sentence if you plead guilty for a minor offence is in fact a default of justice…
But, the call for legal murder is not my conception of Justice.
And yes, the My Lai case is a disgrace. Yes more soldiers and NCO should have been sentenced to harsh punishment.
The same for the Staff Sergeant in Iraq who got 3 WEEKS in a country where you can be fried for less than what he did…
But it is their system
Papewaio
03-19-2012, 02:50
I disagree with the death sentence. I also disagree with non reciprical arrangements.
All the people in an area should be treated on par with their responsibilities not their country of origin. This also means that if the soldier was/is mentally ill he should be locked up and treated as he is not criminally responsible.
The flip side is that too many cases of premeditated or group think have been treated relatively lightly. Which eats into credibility and makes cases which require and hand out mercy look like get out of jail free cards when they are something else.
At this point I wouldn't hold my breath for mercy if it burns the upper management.
End of the day a lone superpower can do what it wants.
PanzerJaeger
03-19-2012, 05:19
“There was plenty of reason from the German point of view.” To kill people they knew had nothing to do with the on-going fight… Which one?
That's the issue. There is much ambiguity surrounding the Oradour-sur-Glane incident as the evidence is largely based on eye witness testimony which has been wrapped up in nationalism as the site has become a French national memorial. The German version, as told by those involved, has the Oradour-sur-Glane incident as a rescue mission for a kidnapped commander that turned into a reprisal against a partisan base responsible for the killing of German soldiers that grew out of hand when the church caught fire.
It is impossible to discern the truth, and I suspect it is somewhere in between, but I have always found it very difficult to believe that a German unit randomly surrounded a town and massacred all its inhabitants. It plays into the 'Nazis were the ultimate evil' typecast well, but it does not make very much operational sense, especially in occupied France. The SS could be ruthless, but they rarely acted without reason.
a completely inoffensive name
03-19-2012, 05:55
It is impossible to discern the truth, and I suspect it is somewhere in between, but I have always found it very difficult to believe that a German unit randomly surrounded a town and massacred all its inhabitants. It plays into the 'Nazis were the ultimate evil' typecast well, but it does not make very much operational sense, especially in occupied France. The SS could be ruthless, but they rarely acted without reason.
I don't even....
Well, they didn't find him and kill 600 people. If it what you call the SS efficiency...
PanzerJaeger
03-19-2012, 22:32
Well, they didn't find him and kill 600 people. If it what you call the SS efficiency...
No, he was never seen again. What they did find was a Maquis stronghold filled with weapons and ammunition in nearly every house. They also found the bodies of executed German soldiers who had gone missing in previous months, some of them burned alive. If that was the case - and again, there is no way to know for sure - reprisal against illegal combatants to stop illegal combat was legal under Geneva '29. One could choose to believe that the unit, which had been in France for some time at that point, one day decided at random to raze a village with no reason, but, in my opinion, it makes much more sense that the incident was a reprisal action that got out of hand.
Sorry, all wrong...
Otto Kahn in his statement of 1962 specifically states that he did not see "executed German soldiers" or a burned out ambulance at any time near Oradour. In fact he does quite specifically state that if he had seen such sights, then he would not have raised any objections to the attack.None of the 21 men on trial for their lives in Bordeaux in 1953 or subsequently Barth in 1983 mention actually finding "executed German soldiers". Or even of having been told about such an incident by their officers before they got to Oradour.
There are no records from German army units showing such causalities as mentioned above.
Diekmann himself never mentioned either finding the bodies of "executed German soldiers" or a burnt out ambulance when he first reported to Stadler in the afternoon of 10th June. According to Otto Weidinger these 'facts' only came to light later before the Divisional Court in Normandy shortly before Diekmann's death and later still from the papers and tapes of Lammerding's estate.
Otto Weidinger says that he met the "Maquis chief in the Dordogne Jugie (called, Gao) in Paris in1969, the latter freely admitted that weapons and ammunition had of course been stashed in all houses in Oradour at that time" (from: Tulle and Oradour a Franco German Tragedy).
If the town was as full of arms, ammunition and explosives, as some have claimed, why was not some use made of them in the defence of Oradour? After all according to Gerlach's statement, the town was a Resistance stronghold full of uniformed fighters.
The ruins of Oradour and they show clear evidence of fire damage, but none of blast damage (for example, no walls blown out). If arms ammunition and explosives were hidden in nearly every house as Weidinger claims, this is not what one would expect to see.
No, my dear Pj, Oradour sur Glane is a clear example of SS/Nazi lies, cowardice and inefficiency, exept in killing defenceless civilians...
"Jean Canou, who was a Sergeant in the FTP and was the man who actually captured Kämpfe on the evening of 9th June said, "I am convinced that the Gestapo confused Oradour-sur-Glane with Oradour-sur-Vayres, a well known centre of resistance twenty miles away. Oradour-sur-Glane was one of the most passive villages in France"
Kadagar_AV
03-21-2012, 00:38
I don't even....
What?
Spell it out. Use your words.
C'mon, you can do it... You don't even... What?
What is it that you do not.... get?
You don't even get how Germans could "just follow orders": Ever heard of Milgram?
You don't even get how Germans could wage war without a reason: Remind me of why the US is in Iraq again?
You don't even... What? Again, spell it out, use your words.
All this condescension is making the windows fog up.
a completely inoffensive name
03-21-2012, 06:50
What?
Spell it out. Use your words.
C'mon, you can do it... You don't even... What?
What is it that you do not.... get?
You don't even get how Germans could "just follow orders": Ever heard of Milgram?
You don't even get how Germans could wage war without a reason: Remind me of why the US is in Iraq again?
You don't even... What? Again, spell it out, use your words.
lol U mad? Reread what I said and highlighted in the quote and maybe you will get the point next time.
PanzerJaeger
03-21-2012, 16:00
Sorry, all wrong...
Otto Kahn in his statement of 1962 specifically states that he did not see "executed German soldiers" or a burned out ambulance at any time near Oradour. In fact he does quite specifically state that if he had seen such sights, then he would not have raised any objections to the attack.None of the 21 men on trial for their lives in Bordeaux in 1953 or subsequently Barth in 1983 mention actually finding "executed German soldiers". Or even of having been told about such an incident by their officers before they got to Oradour.
There are no records from German army units showing such causalities as mentioned above.
Diekmann himself never mentioned either finding the bodies of "executed German soldiers" or a burnt out ambulance when he first reported to Stadler in the afternoon of 10th June. According to Otto Weidinger these 'facts' only came to light later before the Divisional Court in Normandy shortly before Diekmann's death and later still from the papers and tapes of Lammerding's estate.
Otto Weidinger says that he met the "Maquis chief in the Dordogne Jugie (called, Gao) in Paris in1969, the latter freely admitted that weapons and ammunition had of course been stashed in all houses in Oradour at that time" (from: Tulle and Oradour a Franco German Tragedy).
If the town was as full of arms, ammunition and explosives, as some have claimed, why was not some use made of them in the defence of Oradour? After all according to Gerlach's statement, the town was a Resistance stronghold full of uniformed fighters.
The ruins of Oradour and they show clear evidence of fire damage, but none of blast damage (for example, no walls blown out). If arms ammunition and explosives were hidden in nearly every house as Weidinger claims, this is not what one would expect to see.
No, my dear Pj, Oradour sur Glane is a clear example of SS/Nazi lies, cowardice and inefficiency, exept in killing defenceless civilians...
"Jean Canou, who was a Sergeant in the FTP and was the man who actually captured Kämpfe on the evening of 9th June said, "I am convinced that the Gestapo confused Oradour-sur-Glane with Oradour-sur-Vayres, a well known centre of resistance twenty miles away. Oradour-sur-Glane was one of the most passive villages in France"
No link? Luckily, I am familiar with Mike Williams' work (http://www.oradour.info/index.htm), including his lack of footnotes and bias toward his own version of the events. I'm not digging the subtle editing of the quoted material.
His version may be correct. Again, there is no way to know for sure. His quoted points are fairly easy to dispute with material from his own site and a little bit of common sense, though. For example, why would perfectly viable weapons and ammunition be left in the houses to burn? Diekmann did claim to face resistance upon approaching the village, and did mention the executed Germans in a report issued at 17:30 on the very same day.
As to those executed Germans, it is well documented that German forces took casualties to the resistance in the area. Apparently Mr. Williams is 'not aware' of them because he hasn't looked. It is known, and stated on his own site, that the strategy of the trials was to portray Diekmann as a lone madman to cover everyone else involved. Giving him reason (executed Germans) for his actions would have muddled that defense. Khan's statement is particularly dubious as it clears him (second in command) of any responsibility. He claims that he simply walked away and waited in a house while the executions occurred. In any event, the incident which led Diekmann to Oradour-sur-Glane was the execution of a German soldier...
From the sworn statement of Obersturmführer Karl Gerlach:
The Regiment, coming from the south of France, arrived in Limoges during the night of 8/9 June 1944. On the morning of 9 June I received orders from regimental commander Stadler in Limoges to prepare quarters for the assault-gun battalion in the area of Nieul. He instructed me with reference to the map and warned me about the resistance fighters who were active in the area.
I then drove to Nieul with six men in three cars. There we prepared quarters but because the location was not big enough, with reference to the map we drove to the neighbouring communities. My car was faster than the other two. Therefore I soon had to halt and because the others were not following, I turned back to find them. After a short stretch I was suddenly stopped on the open road by a lorry in which I recognised military uniforms. For a second I thought they were friends, because we had been told that Frenchmen in militia uniform were fighting on our side. Before I was able to consider any further, let alone make use of my sub-machine gun, seven or eight uniformed men had jumped out of the lorry, trained their weapons on us and were approaching my car shouting and calling for us to put our hands up.
They dragged my driver and myself out of the car, tore the uniforms from our bodies, hit us in the face and said, accompanied by quite unmistakable gesticulations: 'SS-finished now'.
All we had on was our underwear. They shoved us off the road as we were into a thicket. I was convinced that they would shoot us straight away, so I tried to get a word in and explain something to them, first to their leader, a tall slim man in his early thirties and wearing militia uniform.
He did not seem to understand me at all because all he said was: 'No SS! SS finished!' So I spoke to a younger man who spoke relatively good German, obviously an Alsatian and who seemed to feel sorry for us, but that did not help either. I then stated that I was an orderly officer of the division and that I could give them important information if they brought me to their Marquis commander. That seemed to make an impression on the Alsatian who translated it to his leader. The latter looked at me and said something to me, but I was unable to understand.
My driver and I were dragged back to the lorry. We were told to get in and drove off with our armed escort. After a while I saw some village signs and was able to get my bearings. Then came a sign at the beginning of a village, which read: Oradour-sur-Glane. Here we halted in the main street. We had to get out and were surrounded by Marquis and a lot of curious onlookers. I noticed a lot of people in uniform, even women with yellow jackets and steel helmets. The atmosphere became more threatening from minute to minute and one of the uniformed men therefore had us brought back to the lorry. I saw ropes being brought out of a barn next to a bakery in the main street. My driver and I were made to get down from the lorry again and were bound with the ropes, with both arms behind our backs; the knots were additionally secured with wire. We stood like this for about three-quarters of an hour. Then two French civilians came along on a tandem. They spoke to the assembled people and we had to get back into the lorry.
The men who had captured us still accompanied us as guards. We drove away from Oradour-sur-Glane, the tandem about a hundred metres in front and constantly giving us signs. We stopped for the first time at a house on whose front there was a telephone sign. The two civilians riding the tandem telephoned from here. They returned to the lorry and explained something to what seemed to be the leader of our escort.
We then drove off the main road to the left into an area that was quite without any buildings. After three or four kilometres we were dropped off at a picket, the ropes were undone and we were given something to eat. The lorry with our escort drove on and came back about two or three hours later. We were again tied up and got back onto the lorry.
We continued for eight to ten kilometres to a glade in the forest where I saw a milestone reading: 6.5 km to Bellac. We turned of the road into this glade and in about 300 metres further on came upon a French lorry bearing the tricolour.
Here we were again dragged out of the lorry and badly mistreated. We were hauled before a young Marquis, wearing a blue uniform who appeared to be the commander.
We were not interrogated, he simply shouted at us: 'SS nix listen, finished now'. The young Alsatian, one of our escorts tried to intervene but the commander snapped at him very harshly. The commander then called to some other Frenchmen, also wearing blue uniforms and as far as I could make out from the signs and movements gave them orders to lead us into the woods and shoot us. My driver quite clearly realised what was going on and struggled and tried to resist being taken away. The Frenchmen standing around us became infuriated and set about him. I grabbed the opportunity and dashed for the nearby woods. I ran for all I was worth, I ran for my life. I heard shots and as I turned round I saw my driver slump to the ground. I plunged onwards, seeking cover behind trees and bushes. They pursued me and I could hear them shouting behind me; several shots whistled past my head. I changed direction constantly. Through this deception and the cover of falling night I managed to escape.
I had carefully studied the map before leaving Limoges, so I knew that I must come across the railway line between Bellac and Limoges. I did reach it and the next morning, 10 June, I arrived at the command post in Limoges.
I reported to regimental commander Stadler and described what had happened. He told me that I was not the only one who had been attacked and kidnapped on the preceding day. The commander of III battalion Der Führer, an officer named Kämpfe, had not yet returned and was probably dead. The regimental commander told me to have a good rest because we had a difficult march before us.
When I got up the commander of I battalion Der Führer, Diekmann, got me to show him on the map the spot where I had been captured and the way to the place where my driver had been shot. He left soon thereafter with the 3rd company, under the command of Hauptsturmführer Kahn, in the direction of Oradour-sur-Glane.
Yep. There is still the fact no one SS indicted by the French Court for War Crimes did mention Ambulance or any bodies near the village. None. And the problem with what I read from the text you show is, err, a blue uniform would be the Milice, not partisans... The SS Karl Gerlach probably saw some uniform, but it was the one of his allies...
CrossLOPER
03-26-2012, 18:59
I don't even....
Naw man they'd have to send them to camp.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.