British Troops Beat up Iraqis

[Divinus Arma]

This is a video. I posted it here because I wanted to discuss it rather than add it to the video entertainment thread.


What do you guys think of this?

Video Linky. (http://www.break.com/index/britishiraq12.html)
**Warning: Do not deviate from this page on the website unless you want to be mucho offended by mucho offensive thingees.**

Being in the military myself, I understand the perspective of the "commentator".

[Proletariat]

Uhm, being in the military, I feel nauseous after listening to the commentator. The guy sounds like he's getting off on watching it.

:furious3:

He sounds really proffesional.

:no:

[Divinus Arma]

I didn't say I agreed with his perspective or that I emphathize with him. I merely understand his perspective.

I see the super-charged testosterone aggression-frenzy often enough.

[InsaneApache]

If you want to riot then you have to pay the price. These 'youths' should count themselves lucky. A couple of decades ago they would have been read the riot act and if they hadn't dispersed they would have been shot.

A bit naughty of the NOTW to publish this IMO. This happened just after the invasion and is not recent. Now did I miss something here?

You send your soldiers into a war zone, (without the right kit Mr. Blair:no: ) where they know they can be killed at anytime, you train them to be killers, young lads 18/19/20 years old and then you are surprised that they use violence in a riot situation.

They are not Policemen, they are soldiers. Perhaps next time a detachment from Islington Social Services should be imbedded with our boys, then they could give the 'youths' a cup of tea and a chat.

Next thing you know some desk jockey in Whitehall, who's never even seen an SA-80 will want to file criminal charges against these lads. Now that's really criminal. :shame: :wall:

[Adrian II]

I didn't say I agreed with his perspective or that I emphathize with him. I merely understand his perspective.

I see the super-charged testosterone aggression-frenzy often enough.Sure, this sort of behaviour is to be expected in war time. I think it merely demonstrates why war should be seen as a means of last resort, to be used only in self-defense and not as a tool for social or political change -- let alone democratic change in places that have never known democracy. Before you know it, the 'liberators' are razing towns to the ground and calling it a 'fine job'. I mean, this video is peanuts compared to the war crime committed against Fallujah.

[Rodion Romanovich]

Sure, this sort of behaviour is to be expected in war time. I think it merely demonstrates why war should be seen as a means of last resort, to be used only in self-defense and not as a tool for social or political change -- let alone democratic change in places that have never known democracy. Before you know it, the 'liberators' are razing towns to the ground and calling it a 'fine job'. I mean, this video is peanuts compared to the war crime committed against Fallujah.

Well said. I hope Americans who claim they're the only ones to get criticism now see that all critics of the war, including myself, criticize these British actions too, even though they are "peanuts" compared to Fallujah. It remains to see whether the British command will take appropriate actions or not.

[Divinus Arma]

Fallujah was an excellent example of superior U.S. Marine Corps urban warfare. Fallujah was a hugely successful operation with odds-defying casualty ratios. :2thumbsup:

I am less than confident in both of your abilities to accurately assess this situation. :inquisitive:

I have friends who were in Fallujah. The operation was conducted with as much care as possible given the circumstances. Residents were given ample opportunity to clear out.

The city was a snakepit of insurgents and now it is quiet compared to the rest of the country. We need to do the same thing to Al Ramadi as soon as possible.

[Adrian II]

We need to do the same thing to Al Ramadi as soon as possible.By all means. I am sure it will be another fine job.

[rory_20_uk]

Maybe as much care as possible, but still not enough. Using artillery in a city shows not enough care. The maximum care would be troops to go house to house, clearing each in turn. Not an option as the losses would be higher as the insurgents would quickly adapt to this and rig all sorts of traps.

On an aside, was Fellujah the first place "shake and bake" was used, or was that later?

Although many insurgents were killed, many more elsewhere would have been created either by what happened, or what they were told happened. Let's face it, we know Marines are far better troops and inurgents are often kids with ideals and guns. Of course Marines win. But to "train" more kids is to give them further bad ideas and more cheap guns, and as such is very quick, especially with bad press around the place.

Marines are killers, pure and simple. When it comes to taking an enemy beach, few are better. Calming a situation, well they might eventually kill everyone, but that's the only way they know who to calm a populace.

~:smoking:

[master of the puppets]

this riot was a show of violence, the marines did as they were trained, with violence, mind you far less violence than... lets say a North Korean or Iraqi or Iranian soldier would have used. and far less violence than any insurgent would use if they had the same capabilities, no one was be-headed, no one outright tortured or beaten to a bloody pulp, it was not undue violence they used, they used there training and ability to make a private show of dominance over the foe and halted the riot. there will be spite, personal anger too, but for the moment they averted a possibly more violent situation.

[Red Peasant]

Well, it's wrong on one count because these troops should be beating up the thuggish little b*****s roaming the streets here in Britain.

However, what happened in this incident was wrong, but it was two years ago and I hope that the News of the World (scummy gutter newspaper) is made to pay compensation to the families of any British troops who are killed in reprisals for this video. A few British deaths would be viewed as a small price to pray by these parasites in the interests of increased circulation.
It's a shame because the situation in Basra has appeared to be relatively calm for some time now and British troops have been handing over ever more responsibilities to the new civilian agencies in the area. I reckon a phased pullout is getting very close.

[TB666]

Well however leaked this did the right thing.
This needed to be outed, the same as justice towards these men involved needs to be open as well so that the Iraqis will see that justice exist and that Britain doesn't support this behavior. These crimes needs to be reported

The soldiers knew they were doing something wrong since they moved behind the walls before beating them obvious so that the public wouldn't see it or anyone from the media either.

[InsaneApache]

Rudyard Kipling hit the nail on the head over a hundred years ago....

Tommy

I went into a public-'ouse to get a pint o'beer,
The publican 'e up an' sez, "We serve no red-coats here."
The girls be'ind the bar they laughed an' giggled fit to die,
I outs into the street again an' to myself sez I:

O it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, go away";
But it's ``Thank you, Mister Atkins,'' when the band begins to play,
The band begins to play, my boys, the band begins to play,
O it's ``Thank you, Mr. Atkins,'' when the band begins to play.

I went into a theatre as sober as could be,
They gave a drunk civilian room, but 'adn't none for me;
They sent me to the gallery or round the music-'alls,
But when it comes to fightin', Lord! they'll shove me in the stalls!

For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, wait outside";
But it's "Special train for Atkins" when the trooper's on the tide,
The troopship's on the tide, my boys, the troopship's on the tide,
O it's "Special train for Atkins" when the trooper's on the tide.

Yes, makin' mock o' uniforms that guard you while you sleep
Is cheaper than them uniforms, an' they're starvation cheap;
An' hustlin' drunken soldiers when they're goin' large a bit
Is five times better business than paradin' in full kit.

Then it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy how's yer soul?"
But it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll,
The drums begin to roll, my boys, the drums begin to roll,
O it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll.

We aren't no thin red 'eroes, nor we aren't no blackguards too,
But single men in barricks, most remarkable like you;
An' if sometimes our conduck isn't all your fancy paints:
Why, single men in barricks don't grow into plaster saints;

While it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, fall be'ind,"
But it's "Please to walk in front, sir," when there's trouble in the wind,
There's trouble in the wind, my boys, there's trouble in the wind,
O it's "Please to walk in front, sir," when there's trouble in the wind.

You talk o' better food for us, an' schools, an' fires an' all:
We'll wait for extry rations if you treat us rational.
Don't mess about the cook-room slops, but prove it to our face
The Widow's Uniform is not the soldier-man's disgrace.

For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Chuck him out, the brute!"
But it's "Saviour of 'is country," when the guns begin to shoot;
An' it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' anything you please;
But Tommy ain't a bloomin' fool - you bet that Tommy sees!

....................................................................................


Well however leaked this did the right thing.
This needed to be outed, the same as justice towards these men involved needs to be open as well so that the Iraqis will see that justice exist and that Britain doesn't support this behavior. These crimes needs to be reported

The soldiers knew they were doing something wrong since they moved behind the walls before beating them obvious so that the public wouldn't see it or anyone from the media either.

and then taped it :dizzy2:

I've heard some drivel but this takes the biscuit.:wall:

[TB666]

and then taped it :dizzy2:

I've heard some drivel but this takes the biscuit.:wall:
Indeed.
They should have realised by now that pretty much any video that gets made will get leaked sooner or later.:oops:
Which leads to a interesting question, how many crimes have the allied forces actually done over there that aren't caught on film ?? :inquisitive:

[InsaneApache]

Indeed.
They should have realised by now that pretty much any video that gets made will get leaked sooner or later.:oops:
Which leads to a interesting question, how many crimes have the allied forces actually done over there that aren't caught on film ?? :inquisitive:

It is an edited video. What happened prior to that snatch squad going in to get some bodies? Looked like a few hundred rioters throwing stones at the troops. Are you telling me that the Police in the UK don't do that during riots, of course they do.

People need to take a deep breath here and look at the wider picture. It was a war zone. People get maimed and butchered in wars. It's not like it's portrayed in Hollywood.

[Redleg]

Maybe as much care as possible, but still not enough. Using artillery in a city shows not enough care. The maximum care would be troops to go house to house, clearing each in turn. Not an option as the losses would be higher as the insurgents would quickly adapt to this and rig all sorts of traps.

You ever been in a city fight? It's easy to armchair general back in safety. During WW2 cities were destroyed in fashions much worse then what happen in Fellujah. French cities, Italian cities, and Beligum cities that were being defend by Germans with civilians in the area. Then lets discuss what happen in several German cities. Artillery was used in all those fights.



On an aside, was Fellujah the first place "shake and bake" was used, or was that later?

Much earlier. Its an old term for an artillery mission that uses both HE and WP shells.



Although many insurgents were killed, many more elsewhere would have been created either by what happened, or what they were told happened. Let's face it, we know Marines are far better troops and inurgents are often kids with ideals and guns. Of course Marines win. But to "train" more kids is to give them further bad ideas and more cheap guns, and as such is very quick, especially with bad press around the place.

The Marines for the most part are the same age or younger then some of the people that are the insurgents. While part of your point is valid, it makes one assume that you prefer the trained military to fight with one hand tied behind their back, and hobbled at the feet.



Marines are killers, pure and simple. When it comes to taking an enemy beach, few are better. Calming a situation, well they might eventually kill everyone, but that's the only way they know who to calm a populace.


Marines are marines with training to accomplish the military mission assigned to them. To call them killers pure and simple is to not understand the mission of the military in warfighting.

[TB666]

Are you telling me that the Police in the UK don't do that during riots, of course they do.

Yes they do but only when the suspect is resisting arrest(atleast in Sweden).
These boys were already handcuffed and went along peacefully with soldiers.
Any police that would beat a handcuffed suspect gets punished for it.
And that is just for a single punch.
These guys kicked these boys several times when they were lying on the ground including one kick in the nuts which was totally pointless.
They should have brought them in and locked them up, nothing more nothing less.
If they would have gone by the rules this mess wouldn't have started in the first place.

[rory_20_uk]

Redleg, that was rather my point. The two options are to assault in the old fashioned way and destroy a large part of it - thus inflaming the locals even further, or doing an extremely long house to house that would result in loads of casualties. Neither is going to help in the long term in Iraq.

In Iraq they are fighting with one hand tied behind their back - as they are part soldiers and part policemen, and lots of the locals don't even want them there. hence why the pure military part of the campaign was so brief - America going no holds barred and this part is taking so long as the military is "hobbled at the feet".

As you say, it's easy to pick holes in a less than ideal situation. So what would I do? Although the British do have the easier area, the not responding and holding back does seem to be paying dividends, even if its purely then leaving the Iraqis to kill insurgents and vice versa.

I'd say a staged withdrawl would be the best solution. It is a shame that Bush has linked this with utter failure, and hence has nailed his flag to the mast. Americans are not going to sort other people's problems out for them. No one likes a smart arse, especially when they are a different religion.

Get the Arabs to form a coalition force and help lok after one area. At the very least when that area is a complete mess they can't look so smug at you...

It is a shame but I feel that at the current point in time we can do nothing for Iraq, bar possibly aid when requested. Let them fall down into their own pit, but at least that way we're not being dragged down there with them.

~:smoking:

[InsaneApache]

I think you will find that when prisoners are taken then the first thing that happens is that they are subdued...as in given a kicking.

It's as much a psychological thing as physical. In effect showing who's boss and don't mess with me...etc etc.

TBH I've seen worse in Leeds on a Saturday night.

[TB666]

I think you will find that when prisoners are taken then the first thing that happens is that they are subdued...as in given a kicking.

It's as much a psychological thing as physical. In effect showing who's boss and don't mess with me...etc etc.

So you need to beat the crap out of someone who is already cooperating to make them cooperate ??:inquisitive:
If that's how the police works in Great Britain then I feel sorry for british people.

[Major Robert Dump]

They were reaching for weapons! The soldiers feared for the safety of themselves and innocent civilians in the area!

[rory_20_uk]

You've obviously not met many of the British...

A climbing frame was designed by a Finnish company. Had to be strengthened for export to the UK as apparently Finnish youth don't trash things like children's climbing frames when they get bored.

In Britain, "cooperation" is less common than "has been overpowered". :shame:

~:smoking:

[Redleg]

Redleg, that was rather my point. The two options are to assault in the old fashioned way and destroy a large part of it - thus inflaming the locals even further, or doing an extremely long house to house that would result in loads of casualties. Neither is going to help in the long term in Iraq.

That particuler battle was not about a long term solution. The nature of city fighting is even more dangerous for the combatants and the civilians in the area.



In Iraq they are fighting with one hand tied behind their back - as they are part soldiers and part policemen, and lots of the locals don't even want them there. hence why the pure military part of the campaign was so brief - America going no holds barred and this part is taking so long as the military is "hobbled at the feet".

The United States is conducting occupation duties in Iraq. Which requires the soldiers to act as policemen. It happened in German and Japan after WW2 also. The difference in the situations is that German and Japan did not have an active resistance to the occupation.



As you say, it's easy to pick holes in a less than ideal situation. So what would I do? Although the British do have the easier area, the not responding and holding back does seem to be paying dividends, even if its purely then leaving the Iraqis to kill insurgents and vice versa.

Sounds okay in practice - however when applied the media will paint a different picture.




I'd say a staged withdrawl would be the best solution. It is a shame that Bush has linked this with utter failure, and hence has nailed his flag to the mast. Americans are not going to sort other people's problems out for them. No one likes a smart arse, especially when they are a different religion.


Actually I believe there is a staged withdrawl. Not by statement of number of personal but where the current status of Iraq is right now. The 4th Infantry Division has units dedicated to training Iraqi units. (1st Hand information from my brother who is a 1SG who is training Iraqi soldiers along with the rest of his company.)



Get the Arabs to form a coalition force and help lok after one area. At the very least when that area is a complete mess they can't look so smug at you...

Wouldn't work for exactly the reason you alreadly stated.



It is a shame but I feel that at the current point in time we can do nothing for Iraq, bar possibly aid when requested. Let them fall down into their own pit, but at least that way we're not being dragged down there with them.

~:smoking:

To late - the United States and the United Kingdom have an obligation to repair infrastructure and provide a transition to civilian control by the very nature of the invasion and occupation.

[InsaneApache]

To late - the United States and the United Kingdom have an obligation to repair infrastructure and provide a transition to civilian control by the very nature of the invasion and occupation

It's the least we can do considering we destroyed it. Given the lack of WMDs the fact that Blair said right from the off that this war wasn't about regime change, we now have an obligation, nay a duty, to leave that land better than we found it.

In my lifetime I have never felt ashamed to be British, this Iraq war has got me close to it though. We were duped by the politicians on both sides of the pond. If Chirac and Putin weren't so obviously corrupt and getting lots of spodooliks from, let's just say, dodgy regimes, the perhaps we wouldn't have been fooled as easily.

However as Roger Daltey once upon a time said, 'We won't be fooled again'.

[rory_20_uk]

To be fair, the British people were pretty much unanamously opposed to the war, as was the Monarch. Only the politicians were blinded by the "facts". Even then I think Blair was looking to the future. Whether personally or for the UK I'm not sure...

Give the Iraqi's the money to tender for bids and get it all sorted. It's their country - let them act like it.

~:smoking:

[Tribesman]

An interesting post from the 1st battalion Light Infantry website .
What a shower of shites, don't care whether ordered to carry out attack or not, a handful of tossers who I'd quite happily entertain round the guardhouse, as a serving member of the regiment can't wait to meet these guys and enlighten them on the world of fairness and the differnce between men and boys. Pathetic, cowards who hide behind each other. As for the cameraman one day son one day



Anyway it looks like the British might as well withdraw now , the Iraqis have now stopped all co-operation with them .

Does anyone find it wierd that Murdochs media release this in Britain , Would they do the same in America /
Perhaps the wily old git is shifting away from supporting Blair and Co.

[Kanamori]

I feel nauseous after listening to the commentator. The guy sounds like he's getting off on watching it.

My thoughts too. The derranged man taping it sounds as if he belongs in a mental ward. Watching it, I wondered if somebody added the commentary to make it seem even worse.:juggle2:


Beating up hooligan kids isn't exactly the way to end a violent rebellion that views the occupation as unjust.

It is simple: the kids break the law, they get the punishment the law prescribes not a punishment from some lawless soldier blowing off steam.

[Papewaio]

For all the defenders of these actions think on this:

It was two years ago.

Then the tape was leaked to the public very recently.

Suddenly there are 4 guys on charges for their actions.

So... unless there is photographic evidence and it gets leaked no one gets prosecuted.

Chance that an incident is photographed? Say as much as 10%
Chance that it is leaked to the press? Say as much as 10%

So about 1% of all crimes get reported and actioned on if that.

Wow the military is soooooooooo honourable that it has to be bent over the barrel and have the weight of public opinion shoved up their collective arses before they prosecute wrong doings.

Military Honour = 0
Islamic Militants killing each other over cartoons = 0
Free Press = 2

Free Press is the heavy weight champ.

[Divinus Arma]

Tribesman: What is your answer to the Iraq war? What is your plan? :2cents: :trytofly:

[Proletariat]

I didn't say I agreed with his perspective or that I emphathize with him. I merely understand his perspective.


I know, Div. Just wanted to point out the guttural bullying sound of his voice bothered me more than the actual footage, even though it's pretty disgraceful to release someone from a headlock so you can get in a good headbutt.

Pape, do you know what the numbers of soldiers who face UCMJ over there are like?

[Papewaio]

There are two sides to this particular issue.

1) Why the delay in bringing to justice these guys? Is it only because it was publically leaked.

2) Are these guys now going to be made scapegoats for the problems with the military high command.

Ultimately the British military high command have shown a lack of leadership. If they had that quality they would not have waited until it became a PR issue to move on the issue.

Prole what would you expect the sentence be for a uniformed fighter in Afgahnistan killing an American POW be?

[Seamus Fermanagh]

The United States is conducting occupation duties in Iraq. Which requires the soldiers to act as policemen. It happened in German and Japan after WW2 also. The difference in the situations is that German and Japan did not have an active resistance to the occupation.

There was a resistance movement in Europe for some months after the war, that began as a "nobody co-operate with the Allies" effort in the closing weeks of the fighting. Japan was remarkably free of such resistance -- though a nearly successful coup was made by hardliners intent on continuing the war despite atomic weaponry.

[Tribesman]

Tribesman: What is your answer to the Iraq war? What is your plan?
Ah , for that you will have to go back to find "President Tribesmans" inaugral address .
Though that won't work now , the situation is too far gone and there is no way the US population would swallow it , or be able to afford it .:no:

even though it's pretty disgraceful to release someone from a headlock so you can get in a good headbutt.

Come on Prole , you have to release them otherwise the headbutt don't work~;)

[Proletariat]

Prole what would you expect the sentence be for a uniformed fighter in Afgahnistan killing an American POW be?

By 'uniformed fighter' do you mean insurgent or an American soldier? I'm confused because if you meant the former, it wouldn't be covered under UCMJ.

I just wanted to point out that even though you were giving an overly simplistic percentage to make a point, you may not be aware of just how often the military (US, anyway) metes out justice upon it's own for many of these problems. They just don't happen to send out each case in a detailed fashion to the NOTW.

[Papewaio]

If an Afgah or Iraqi killed an American soldier that was a POW what would you expect the sentence range be? 5, 10, 15 years?

[Strike For The South]

Did these guys die? Were they POWs? What was happening beforehand? The video dosent really provide much in the way of evidince (as to circumstancs) I mean if you are going to riot in front of a group of Marines in a war zone which is already unstable. I mean come on do you really excepect them to take it

[Proletariat]

If an Afgah or Iraqi killed an American soldier that was a POW what would you expect the sentence range be? 5, 10, 15 years?

I don't know. Neither Afgahns nor Iraqis are subject to the UCMJ. Redleg might be able to tell you, but I'm having trouble understanding the relevance.

[Papewaio]

Essentially what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

Scenarios.
Iraqi police detain and beat up British soldiers. In that instance information was forthcomming and the reaction by the British High Command was to send in a company to look extract the men.

British soldiers beat up Iraqi protestors. In that instance information to the media was suppressed and the reaction by the British High Command was to forget about it until information was leaked.

====

I have this vague notion that justice is supposed to be equivalent for all.

I also have this vague idea that honour is being consistent in word and deed.

And that leadership is doing something rather being told to do it.

The BHC is not doing well in any of these 3 IMDHO.

[Divinus Arma]

Tribesman: What is your answer to the Iraq war? What is your plan?
Ah , for that you will have to go back to find "President Tribesmans" inaugral address .
Though that won't work now , the situation is too far gone and there is no way the US population would swallow it , or be able to afford it .:no:


Common man. It is totally within your right to question the management of this conflict. But I am curious what you prefer to see done? Yes we are there so "not going in to begin with" isn't really fair. (not that you said that. I am just pre-empting.) What would you do if you were in charge right now?

[makkyo]

The United States is conducting occupation duties in Iraq. Which requires the soldiers to act as policemen. It happened in German and Japan after WW2 also. The difference in the situations is that German and Japan did not have an active resistance to the occupation.

This and WW2 are hard to compare. The times have changed, and the very nature of this war is very different. There was little resistance in Germany/Japan because they were tired of fighting a war for over half a decade that stretched their resources to the breaking point. After the Allies finally won, every that could fight already has. The reasons for the Germans and Japanese for entering armed conflict is very different from the Muslims as well. Why do I say Muslims and not Iraqis/Syrians/Iranis/Saudis? Because none of them are uniformed and fighting for any of their governments. It is harder to identify friend from foe, ethnic differences aside.


Now about that video... it failed to show completelywhat happened. Why were those kids there? What did they do? What happened after? None of these are shown by this 2-year old video that is obviously leaked for political reasons. In the US, only things that don't "present a clear and present threat" are protected by the constitution. Perhaps these journalists should care more for the lives of their nation's soldiers and citizens abroad than for simply stirring up more violence so they can have another story to tell.

British high command can hardly be to blame for this. Here we have guys from 18-21 years old on police duty. They are trained to be soldiers and fighters. Killers even. But when you have a bunch of Iraqi kids protesting, you are bound to have some pretty angry soldiers. If you plan on demonstrating in the middle of a war zone, expect some swift retribution.

[Redleg]

If an Afgah or Iraqi killed an American soldier that was a POW what would you expect the sentence range be? 5, 10, 15 years?

Since the Iraqi insurgents have killed captives - I think you have your answer.

Nothing happens until they are caught by the opposing force. We all know what happen to German officers that ordered the slaughter of American POW's during the Battle of the Buldge. Several were hanged for war crimes, several were given life sentences, and others were given several years depending upon their actions.

Now if your asking if the current sentences being given to American servicemen convicted of killing a POW in captivity. (There was a recent one involving a senior Iraqi General who was killed during intergation by a Warrant Officer. You can look up the sentence, it was light in my opinion, but I don't have the details of the trail record.)


The UCMJ like all laws deals with intent of the action, when passing sentence.

[Redleg]

This and WW2 are hard to compare. The times have changed, and the very nature of this war is very different. There was little resistance in Germany/Japan because they were tired of fighting a war for over half a decade that stretched their resources to the breaking point. After the Allies finally won, every that could fight already has. The reasons for the Germans and Japanese for entering armed conflict is very different from the Muslims as well. Why do I say Muslims and not Iraqis/Syrians/Iranis/Saudis? Because none of them are uniformed and fighting for any of their governments. It is harder to identify friend from foe, ethnic differences aside.

I think you missed the intent of the post.



British high command can hardly be to blame for this. Here we have guys from 18-21 years old on police duty. They are trained to be soldiers and fighters. Killers even. But when you have a bunch of Iraqi kids protesting, you are bound to have some pretty angry soldiers. If you plan on demonstrating in the middle of a war zone, expect some swift retribution.

Soldiers in the British Army just like the American Army have officers and NCO's over them. The question of leadership is valid in my opinion.

[makkyo]

:inquisitive:
Soldiers in the British Army just like the American Army have officers and NCO's over them. The question of leadership is valid in my opinion.

Then do the armed forces not have the right to teach these rioters a lesson? Are they out of line for excersizing their authority during an invasion? I think these guys got what they deserved, though the commentary is a little.... :inquisitive:

[Proletariat]

I have this vague notion that justice is supposed to be equivalent for all.


I can't speak on anything BHC, but you must also have a vague notion about discretion. Just because it isn't in the fishwraps doesn't mean it's being ignored by the higher-ups.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Good point, Prole!

In our mediated world, it is easy to assume that only if it is being reported on is anything being done about it.

Perhaps no charges were proferred until the vid was made public, which might be cause for some concern if it was officially suppressed, but I haven't seen info on that.

Even then, the basic value of Prole's comment would still be valid.

[Redleg]

:inquisitive:

Then do the armed forces not have the right to teach these rioters a lesson? Are they out of line for excersizing their authority during an invasion? I think these guys got what they deserved, though the commentary is a little.... :inquisitive:

Well according to the UCMJ that is applied to the servicemen and women in the United States Military their actions (The soldiers doing the beating) are punishable.

The video shows that the beatings were not done to quell the riot, which would be one method of stopping a riot, and therefor one could argue that the soldiers were only doing their mission - with proper military bearing and violence to bring about a successful conclusion in a quick manner.

But the video shows something else now doesn't?

[Papewaio]

I can't speak on anything BHC, but you must also have a vague notion about discretion. Just because it isn't in the fishwraps doesn't mean it's being ignored by the higher-ups.

I thought a basic tenant of justice was to be seen to be done... not just discretly done so as not to embarass the very leadership that are responsible for creating the situation. Discretion in this case is not justice it is coverup with a sweetener. Discretion is for occassions when the enemy may find out ones plans of warfare, it is not the correct term for covering up crimes.

And 2 years after the fact?

Why isn't the command doing its own investigations and/or prosecutions without the heat of publicity. Again it shows a basic lack of leadership when they need others to tell them what to do. Lacking leadership ability is not what I assume is a model officer.

[Proletariat]

Discretion in this case is not justice it is coverup with a sweetener. Discretion is for occassions when the enemy may find out ones plans of warfare, it is not the correct term for covering up crimes.


Of course, Pape. Ideally justice would be transparent, but I'm sure you can appreciate the concern. You might as well have the BHC and Pentagon make propaganda videos for the insurgents if you're going to release every incident to the press. It's just fanning the flames unnecessarily.

Again, I don't know about the British military justice system at all. But there's lots of soldiers who face UCMJ fairly frequently for the stupid things they do, stateside and in Iraq and Afghanistan. You can't just assume that since it's not in the papers that the coalition soldiers must be having a bash-o-rama down there.

Btw, I haven't looked much into the story yet, but I think alot of the reason for the delay was because the narrator was showing folks at home the video. Someone saw it and was upset by it and they were the ones who called the newspaper. Most likely the reason why it took two years to come out.

[GoreBag]

I don't know about anyone else, but the video kind of screams 'Orange' to me.

[QwertyMIDX]

Of course, Pape. Ideally justice would be transparent, but I'm sure you can appreciate the concern. You might as well have the BHC and Pentagon make propaganda videos for the insurgents if you're going to release every incident to the press. It's just fanning the flames unnecessarily.

If the actions of British and US soilders are only inciting more violence maybe they shouldn't be there at all?

Any government (occupying or otherwise) that is forced to resort to coercive force to silence poitical dissent has already lost its legitimacy in my eyes. I've been chased, hit, and tear gased by too many cops (in 2 countries) for doing nothing but standing on public property to believe that this sort of violence is justified.

[InsaneApache]

Here is an eyewitness report from the riot preceeding the video showing soldiers beating rioters.


Ali was negotiating with the demonstrators, but was getting nowhere. When the first stone hit my head we tried to retreat to the car, where the driver was sitting with the engine running and his foot on the pedal.

But we could not get there. Half a dozen rioters had grabbed Teri and an octopus of hostile arms was pulling her into the crowd. She grabbed my wrist. I tried to pull her back, but she was vanishing into the human quicksand. We had no choice but throw ourselves at her assailants, one of whom was trying to smash her skull with a rock.

link (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,7374-2041183,00.html)

He does go on to say that he didn't think the Iraqi 'youths' should have been beaten by the soldiers, but then says this.


It was as unpleasant and dangerous a mob as I had ever seen


The officials admitted that the al-Amarah police — with little training and strong loyalties to the powerful tribe accused of nepotism — had “panicked” and killed about half a dozen protesters, some armed with explosives, blast bombs and grenades.

So no furore if Iraqis are killed by their own police, but all hell breaks loose if a British soldier slaps a kid about for rioting. They are lucky not to have been shot by the sound of it.

[Proletariat]

Any government (occupying or otherwise) that is forced to resort to coercive force to silence poitical dissent has already lost its legitimacy in my eyes.

Well, great for you. :2thumbsup:

My point had nothing to do with whether we should be there or not.

[QwertyMIDX]

I disagree, if the actions (incidents) of occupying troops are only causing more violence, maybe they should leave. Seems like an obvious connect to me. Why is trying to hide what's happening more logical?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I think a few things have been missed here:

1. Leaking the video will get soldiers killed.

2. They're not marines, they're the first Battalion Light Infantry, they're not elite or super-killing machines.

3. Just because you don't here about it doesn't mean they weren't punished.

4. You assume that High Command knew, soldiers close ranks and protect themselves and eachother.

5. Most soldiers aren't like that and I think this is the first example of the British Army doing something "wrong" rather than just some squady making a bad decision.

As to a lack of leadership in the General Staff, well everybody hates RMP SIB (Royal Military Police, Special Investigation Branch, a.k.a. S*** in bulk). You can't have someone looking over a Squady's shoulder because he will have to do things that civi's can't. If every Iraqi they shoot is a potential terrorist that might kill them, they are in a war zone and you can't sit at home and judge them unless you've been there.

I wouls also point out that three years ago, early 2004, was the time those six RMP TAs got shot. After that that the rules of engagement changed, they stopped worrying about being nice and stated thinking about staying alive.

One of my mates was down the road when those RMPs got shot. The Paras were trying to fight through to them but they failed. They thought it was a religious procession so they moved the Landrovers off the road! Then the news makes it sound like they were sat down having tea! One of that mob grabbed a little girl to use as a human shield, so a para ran the gauntlet a got her, then ran back.

I'm not saying what the guys in the video did was right, far from it. It was petty, brutal and cowardly but you have to understand the anger at the time.

[Tribesman]

One of my mates was down the road when those RMPs got shot. The Paras were trying to fight through to them but they failed.
Well your mate is bullshitting you , the role of the Paras and their failings that day were clearly shown in the MODs inquiry . They did bugger all to get to the police station because their CO decided it was too dangerous to attempt with the assets he had available .
What your mate is describing is the Paras operation 100 yards away from the police station , that occured before the RMPs had come under attack .

[InsaneApache]

nm...

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

One of my mates was down the road when those RMPs got shot. The Paras were trying to fight through to them but they failed.
Well your mate is bullshitting you , the role of the Paras and their failings that day were clearly shown in the MODs inquiry . They did bugger all to get to the police station because their CO decided it was too dangerous to attempt with the assets he had available .
What your mate is describing is the Paras operation 100 yards away from the police station , that occured before the RMPs had come under attack .

Yes, because 100 yards down the road was the tail end of the mob. 167 dead Iraqis, IIRC. Given there were only 20-30 of them I'd be inclined to agree with the Ruppert.

MOD enquiries are also bullshit.

[Tribesman]

I'd be inclined to agree with the Ruppert.

Agree with which part of the ruperts statement , the one where he said he didn't know they were there , the one where he said he didn't know they were under attack or the one where he said he didn't know where the police station was ? (all of which were shown as false)
Or just the final one where he said he couldn't do anything .

[Papewaio]

I think a few things have been missed here:

1. Leaking the video will get soldiers killed.


The blame should not be laid at the media. It should be laid at anyone who kills soldiers, then to those who incite the violence, then the soldiers who did the crime for providing the example that others can use to incite the violence, and then to the command that cannot control its own troops.

It is a cop out to blame the media.


2. They're not marines, they're the first Battalion Light Infantry, they're not elite or super-killing machines.

So because they are light infantry they are allowed to do criminal acts?


3. Just because you don't here about it doesn't mean they weren't punished.

These crimes weren't punished until the video was leaked. So why is the media showing more competence then the military in investigating the militaries actions...


4. You assume that High Command knew, soldiers close ranks and protect themselves and eachother.

Oh so instead of lacking leadership they are incompetent because they don't know what their own soldiers are doing.

Command Fail
Control Fail
Communication Fail... man what a military to be proud of.


5. Most soldiers aren't like that and I think this is the first example of the British Army doing something "wrong" rather than just some squady making a bad decision.

You just stated that the soldiers close ranks. Aiding a crime is a crime in itself.

Nor is this the first example of the British military doing something wrong and others finding out first... remember the prisoners hanging from forklifts?



As to a lack of leadership in the General Staff, well everybody hates RMP SIB (Royal Military Police, Special Investigation Branch, a.k.a. S*** in bulk). You can't have someone looking over a Squady's shoulder because he will have to do things that civi's can't. If every Iraqi they shoot is a potential terrorist that might kill them, they are in a war zone and you can't sit at home and judge them unless you've been there.

Incorrect on two counts.

1) I don't think the definition of a terrorist stretches to someone only fighting military.

2) Living in a democracy I have the right to judge and vote on what happens. The actions that the military do on my behalf may infact be the very actions that do not save us but endanger us. They military also may go down a path that promotes injustice and vigilante actions, these are not something that I wish to have done on my behalf. If the military want me to honour their achievements that can expect me to get angry with their gross failures.


I'm not saying what the guys in the video did was right, far from it. It was petty, brutal and cowardly but you have to understand the anger at the time.

Three points of failure at least.

Improper training for riots.
Improper leadership by the NCO's... kicking prisoners in the nuts not withstanding.
Improper actions by the individuals.

Anger is not a valid excuse for brutality. Anger is a reason for brutality.

Given that the coalition of the willing went in to Iraq to same the Iraqi people from a brutal dictator and to win the hearts and minds of the people. Don't you think these squaddies are responsible for the failure of upholding their portion of the main mission?

Of course the PR reason for us being in Iraq is probably not why we are in Iraq. If this was an act of colonialism then the actions of the squaddies would be par for the course...

[QwertyMIDX]

1. Leaking the video will get soldiers killed.


And not leaking it will probably get civilians killed because the military won't be held accountable for their actions. It's a war; if someone is going to die I'd rather it be soldiers than civilians.

Further, blaming the media for the reaction to this is just plain silly, the soldiers committed the acts that will likely cause reprisals, not the media.

[solypsist]

not true. there are scores of videos and photos (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1127650/posts) of them doing this on a regular basis - remember the issue last year of Brit soldiers spit roasting an iraqi infant?.

winning their hearts and minds, indeed.


5. Most soldiers aren't like that and I think this is the first example of the British Army doing something "wrong" rather than just some squady making a bad decision.

[InsaneApache]

not true. there are scores of videos and photos (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1127650/posts) of them doing this on a regular basis - remember the issue last year of Brit soldiers spit roasting an iraqi infant?.

winning their hearts and minds, indeed.

Get your facts straight. This was shown to be a hoax over a year ago. You naughty boy, you.:phonecall:

Must be nice to sit in your chairs pontificating about how the soldiers should have done this and that, they should be trained better etc etc. Some of the comments on here range from the risible to the nauseous.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

"And not leaking it will probably get civilians killed because the military won't be held accountable for their actions. It's a war; if someone is going to die I'd rather it be soldiers than civilians.

Further, blaming the media for the reaction to this is just plain silly, the soldiers committed the acts that will likely cause reprisals, not the media."

I agree that blame ultimately rests with the soldiers themselves but the media published it to sell papers, not out of principle. I would have handed the take to the RMPs, not the MOD.

solypsist, All fakes. The only other instance of anything like this is what happened to the looters at camp bread basket and I went through most of that when I was 14 as a Cadet. Added to which they were following orders, which soldiers have to do, or the system grinds to a halt.

"So because they are light infantry they are allowed to do criminal acts?"

Absolutely not. I was simply pointing out that all the crap posted about Marines was bull and that these guys aren't Marines; I rather like Marines as a rule.

"These crimes weren't punished until the video was leaked. So why is the media showing more competence then the military in investigating the militaries actions..."

You have to know there is something to investigate. You can't investigate everything soldiers do, because they all do bad things, mainly because they have to, because otherwise they get killed. How are the RMPs going to get wind of this if all the guys that were there keep their mouths shut?

"Oh so instead of lacking leadership they are incompetent because they don't know what their own soldiers are doing.

Command Fail
Control Fail
Communication Fail... man what a military to be proud of."

Bull, how would they find out, since the Provost isn't allowed to even make them hold up a shell case for a few hours? The buck stops with the first officer for disobediance. If a second leutenant has no control over his soldiers in the field its not the major's fault 20 miles away. If the soldiers are stupid enough to let it show then it is the Major's fault but generally they're very good at playing the game and the Leutenant is too embarressed to say anything, so he just stays out of the way.

"You just stated that the soldiers close ranks. Aiding a crime is a crime in itself.

Nor is this the first example of the British military doing something wrong and others finding out first... remember the prisoners hanging from forklifts?"

Sorry, forklifts? was that Camp Bread Basket? If it was the blame rests with the Major, not his soldiers. As to closing ranks, well if you tell someone and it doesn't work out you're in for a kicking. Even if it does no one will trust you and your carrier is over.

"I don't think the definition of a terrorist stretches to someone only fighting military."

A terrorist is someone who incites terror, the guys beaten up in the video weren't but anyone with an AK under his jacket or firing morters is. Further these men are not covered by the Geneva convention.

"Living in a democracy I have the right to judge and vote on what happens. The actions that the military do on my behalf may infact be the very actions that do not save us but endanger us. They military also may go down a path that promotes injustice and vigilante actions, these are not something that I wish to have done on my behalf. If the military want me to honour their achievements that can expect me to get angry with their gross failures."

You have a right in general but you're not equipped to judge individual soldiers on the ground because you haven't been there.

"Agree with which part of the ruperts statement , the one where he said he didn't know they were there , the one where he said he didn't know they were under attack or the one where he said he didn't know where the police station was ? (all of which were shown as false)
Or just the final one where he said he couldn't do anything."

The one you referenced originally, that he couldn't dp anything.

[solypsist]

then i stand corrected on this - a thousand apologies, taisho. :shame:


Get your facts straight. This was shown to be a hoax over a year ago. You naughty boy, you.:phonecall:

Must be nice to sit in your chairs pontificating about how the soldiers should have done this and that, they should be trained better etc etc. Some of the comments on here range from the risible to the nauseous.

[InsaneApache]

Np mate. :2thumbsup:

[makkyo]

The video shows that the beatings were not done to quell the riot, which would be one method of stopping a riot, and therefor one could argue that the soldiers were only doing their mission - with proper military bearing and violence to bring about a successful conclusion in a quick manner.

Can you elaborate on the difference between dispersing the riot and actually quelling one? I don't think simply charging down the street was going to cut it.