RE: U.S. Serviceman shoots Afghan civilians

RE: U.S. Serviceman shoots Afghan civilians (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Nosathro -> RE: U.S. Serviceman shoots Afghan civilians (3/16/2012 10:52:47 AM)
Yes and he got one, John Henry Browne of Settle. Wonder who is paying his bill, he is high price lawyer. As I have said before, I have never in my career of working with the mental ill seen one when confronted with his behavior respond as this guy did. http://news.yahoo.com/lawyer-afghan-suspects-friend-had-leg-blown-off-033637373.html

tweakabelle -> RE: U.S. Serviceman shoots Afghan civilians (3/17/2012 3:04:06 AM)
quote: If you look historically at the Military Justice system when it comes to such crimes in Iraq and Afghanistain, is very poor. The last one I know of was a Marine who ordered his men to shoot first and ask questions later, 7 civilian were killed including children, he was convicted of "Delection of Duty" no jail time, no reduction in rank or pay, in fact no punish at all to speak of. The Army is moving to find a way out of this, this guy will walk away as did so many. You make a strong point here IMHO. The record suggests that Bails is going to get off lightly if they can't find a way of exonerating him completely. My Lai was the site of the "Vietnam War mass murder of between 347 and 504 unarmed civilians in South Vietnam on March 16, 1968, by United States Army soldiers of "Charlie" Company of 1st Battalion, 20th Infantry Regiment, 11th Brigade of the Americal Division. Most of the victims were women, children (including babies), and elderly people. Some of the bodies were later found to be mutilated.[2] While 26 US soldiers were initially charged with criminal offenses for their actions at Mỹ Lai, only Second Lieutenant William Calley, a platoon leader in Charlie Company, was convicted. Found guilty of killing 22 villagers,he was originally given a life sentence, but only served three and a half years under house arrest." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Lai The recent massacre at Habitha Iraq left dozens of innocent Iraqi dead yet the leader of those responsible served 3 months in the stockade for minor disciplinary breaches. Already Bails has been removed from Afghani jurisdiction. This is the first step that needs to be taken to ensure that he isn't made to account fully for his actions. History tells us there's little point in expecting the US military to ensure a full accounting, or appropriate punishment. It would be nice to be proved wrong, but have little confidence that anything approaching justice is going to occur here.

farglebargle -> RE: U.S. Serviceman shoots Afghan civilians (3/17/2012 4:58:14 AM)
When is the hanging? There's been plenty of time for a court martial, appeals, and the president's signature on the death warrant. It's not like there's a whole lot of ambiguity here. The guy TURNED HIMSELF IN.

Politesub53 -> RE: U.S. Serviceman shoots Afghan civilians (3/17/2012 5:05:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarqueMirror Humans aren't dogs. And I'm less inclined to "put down" one of our soldiers for killing members of a society who deem murder and acceptable consequence for burning a book. So which of the dead woman and children deemed murder acceptable ? If your government have decided to try this chap under military law, they should carry out whatever the normal penalty would be. But giving him a free pass because its only some Muslims seems a bit of a cop out on your part. NOTHING justifies the premeditated of innocents, absolutely nothing. As I said before, his mental state should be taken into account, if that means he walks free, so be it. Seems to me that should be his only redress in such a situation.

farglebargle -> RE: U.S. Serviceman shoots Afghan civilians (3/17/2012 5:20:17 AM)
quote: his mental state should be taken into account Whatever for? If he's sane, then he's a murderer in the worst way, and we're all better off once he's dead. If he's insane, there's two options: 1) He can't be rehabilitated. He's a mad dog. Put him down, and we don't have to worry about him attacking a nurse. 2) He can be rehabilitated. If you woke up one day, and realized you murdered all these innocents, wouldn't you be compelled to commit suicide over your grief? If you don't have that grief, you're INSANE, ( see (1) He can't be rehabilitated ), but if you're actually sane and KNOW that you're a sick murderer who is unfit to live, suicide is the only course for a "Sane" person in that situation. We'd be doing him a favor by never letting him regain his sanity and executing him before there's a chance.

Politesub53 -> RE: U.S. Serviceman shoots Afghan civilians (3/17/2012 5:27:27 AM)
Fargle, your views of how people with mental heath problems should be treated are sick. Thats about the mildest way I could describe it. Lets just hope no one close to you is ever unfortunate enough to suffer in such a way.

farglebargle -> RE: U.S. Serviceman shoots Afghan civilians (3/17/2012 5:57:15 AM)
I'm not sure what your problem is? The guy murdered a bunch of innocents in their bed. He admitted that, and there's all the DEAD PEOPLE to support his claim. I figure forensics on the weapon and shit are pretty much a formality. What with the whole "turning yourself in" thing. So, let's just move forward from that. Which of the 3 options do you disagree with? 1: Sane - And we need to put him down because if we don't then we green-light everyone else thinking along the same lines. 2a: Insane - Can't be fixed. Why take the risk of him killing again. He can't be fixed. 2b: Insane - Can be fixed. In what world wouldn't he experience overwhelming suicidal grief over his sins? If he doesn't FEEL that grief, is he 'fixed', or really just 2a? I don't see a scenario -- GIVEN THAT HE'S A HORRIFIC MURDERER -- where we do any favors to him or ourselves by delaying his hanging. And isn't it cruel to prolong his death in this situation?

TheHeretic -> RE: U.S. Serviceman shoots Afghan civilians (3/17/2012 6:51:41 AM)
Polite, you won't find Fargle and I on the same page very often, but this one is going to be about as close as it gets to happening. The man needs to face the death penalty for his crimes, and he needs to face it from within the US military justice system. Now I don't see any reason why his line to such proceedings should move faster than Nidal Hasan's, and I don't like dehumanizing the people we march to such an end, but death is the appropriate punishment for a crime like this. Those (in general, not you specifically) who want to interpret this within their pre-existing hatred of the military are going to walk their fine line, trying to paint him as a victim, with the "true" blame lying higher up in the system, without going so high as to pin it on a Commander in Chief who keeps sending our soldiers into a grinder he knows is lost, without even the decency to offer them a lie about victory.

Nosathro -> RE: U.S. Serviceman shoots Afghan civilians (3/17/2012 9:19:08 AM)
When I was in the Army if you were in confinement the Army had 45 days to bring you to trial, the clock is ticking. In a television news report about this guy he may not be the poor innocent person some think he is. He enlisted in the Army after 9/11 he was 26 years of age, before enlisting he had some court actions taken against me, all for violent crimes, and was to attend Angre Management, he enlisted instead.

Moonhead -> RE: U.S. Serviceman shoots Afghan civilians (3/17/2012 9:41:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Polite, you won't find Fargle and I on the same page very often, but this one is going to be about as close as it gets to happening. The man needs to face the death penalty for his crimes, and he needs to face it from within the US military justice system. Why? Handing him over to the local authorities would work just as well, and would do a much better job of making sure this shit doesn't happen again than three days of plea bargaining in a military court and a medical discharge.

TheHeretic -> RE: U.S. Serviceman shoots Afghan civilians (3/17/2012 10:36:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead Why? Handing him over to the local authorities would work just as well, and would do a much better job of making sure this shit doesn't happen again than three days of plea bargaining in a military court and a medical discharge. No, Moon, it wouldn't work just as well. What happens to this soldier, needs to happen in accordance with our customs and rituals. I frankly don't give one shit more about these particular dead villagers, or the outrage of the locals, than if they had been bystanders to a drone launched Hellfire missile. His crime was against our code of conduct, and that's what he has to answer for.

farglebargle -> RE: U.S. Serviceman shoots Afghan civilians (3/17/2012 11:36:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Polite, you won't find Fargle and I on the same page very often, but this one is going to be about as close as it gets to happening. The man needs to face the death penalty for his crimes, and he needs to face it from within the US military justice system. Now I don't see any reason why his line to such proceedings should move faster than Nidal Hasan's, and I don't like dehumanizing the people we march to such an end, but death is the appropriate punishment for a crime like this. Those (in general, not you specifically) who want to interpret this within their pre-existing hatred of the military are going to walk their fine line, trying to paint him as a victim, with the "true" blame lying higher up in the system, without going so high as to pin it on a Commander in Chief who keeps sending our soldiers into a grinder he knows is lost, without even the decency to offer them a lie about victory. Oh, don't get me wrong. Everyone from the NCO's all the way have fucked up by not enforcing real discipline from day-one. I don't blame Obama, since he really shouldn't know any better -- not having been through the military -- but Bush supposedly did, and the organization should have been fixed long before. This shit just shows we ain't advanced one fucking bit since Steven Dale Green and his band of merry rapist/murderer in Iraq... When your average biker gang has better discipline than your army, you are well and truly fucked.

farglebargle -> RE: U.S. Serviceman shoots Afghan civilians (3/17/2012 11:38:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Polite, you won't find Fargle and I on the same page very often, but this one is going to be about as close as it gets to happening. The man needs to face the death penalty for his crimes, and he needs to face it from within the US military justice system. Why? Handing him over to the local authorities would work just as well, and would do a much better job of making sure this shit doesn't happen again than three days of plea bargaining in a military court and a medical discharge. "We Take Care Of Our Own" If they fall on the battlefield, we bring them home. If they need to be hanged, we do it ourselves. Don't ask another man to shoot your dog. They might not do it right, and the dog might suffer for it.

Moonhead -> RE: U.S. Serviceman shoots Afghan civilians (3/17/2012 2:44:32 PM)
If my dog had killed another man's child, I'd be perfectly happy for him to take as long to kill it as he wanted. (See the problem with bullshit emotive metaphors like that?)

farglebargle -> RE: U.S. Serviceman shoots Afghan civilians (3/17/2012 3:15:27 PM)
Yeah, but we're talking about our GOVERNMENT here, and not another person. "Swift Justice" is the best justice. "Anger" and "Punishment" aren't the point. "Justice" and "Teaching A Lesson" are the points. And there's no reason to delay either.

Moonhead -> RE: U.S. Serviceman shoots Afghan civilians (3/17/2012 3:21:08 PM)
In this case the point is a deterrent to any other stupid git with poor self control issues who thinks he can wipe out a bunch of the locals with impunity, not justice. A public beheading would get that point across a lot better than a dishonorable discharge.

Politesub53 -> RE: U.S. Serviceman shoots Afghan civilians (3/17/2012 6:56:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Polite, you won't find Fargle and I on the same page very often, but this one is going to be about as close as it gets to happening. The man needs to face the death penalty for his crimes, and he needs to face it from within the US military justice system. Now I don't see any reason why his line to such proceedings should move faster than Nidal Hasan's, and I don't like dehumanizing the people we march to such an end, but death is the appropriate punishment for a crime like this. Those (in general, not you specifically) who want to interpret this within their pre-existing hatred of the military are going to walk their fine line, trying to paint him as a victim, with the "true" blame lying higher up in the system, without going so high as to pin it on a Commander in Chief who keeps sending our soldiers into a grinder he knows is lost, without even the decency to offer them a lie about victory. Oh, don't get me wrong. Everyone from the NCO's all the way have fucked up by not enforcing real discipline from day-one. I don't blame Obama, since he really shouldn't know any better -- not having been through the military -- but Bush supposedly did, and the organization should have been fixed long before. This shit just shows we ain't advanced one fucking bit since Steven Dale Green and his band of merry rapist/murderer in Iraq... When your average biker gang has better discipline than your army, you are well and truly fucked. Ive got no problem with him facing whatever is coming to him. My only gripe is if it was known he was mentally ill prior to this taking place, then he should have had some support. He certainly shouldnt have been left in the arena. Its only public pressure which has led UK servicemen to get better treatment. Those exposed to radiation and shit in Gulf war1 had all sorts of obstacles thrown in their path when they tried to get compensation.

tweakabelle -> RE: U.S. Serviceman shoots Afghan civilians (3/17/2012 8:57:54 PM)
I'm not sure why so many people seem to be assuming that the person concerned is going to get the death penalty. The record suggests that this is most unlikely. If we go by the record, he's far more likely to be given a slap on the wrist. The only thing that might cause this thug to be sentenced severely is that his actions have screwed up the West's exit strategy in Afghanistan. That, rather than punishing his butchery or distaste at his crimes, might cause him to be given a harsh sentence. The powers that be don't like the lower orders messing with their grand plans. And as for the poor dead Afghanis ...... they barely figure in any one's calculations do they? Did I hear any one say "the sanctity of life" or "human rights" or "killing innocent civilians"? I thought not.

Aswad -> RE: U.S. Serviceman shoots Afghan civilians (3/17/2012 9:08:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 Its only public pressure which has led UK servicemen to get better treatment. Those exposed to radiation and shit in Gulf war1 had all sorts of obstacles thrown in their path when they tried to get compensation. Absolutely. I've had half an eye on the UK situation in connection with our own Gulf War veterans, and it's quite appalling. Don't know if you read it, but I translated a few articles about our own a little while ago, in the thread on the cost of war. Some heavy shit, that. Can't recall if I got around to the one that dealt with the UK veterans or not (their efforts were helpful for our own Gulf War veterans). People do tragic things under the influence of illness or injury sometimes, and shouldn't have to answer for what they have no control over. But there's a system around them that certainly needs to answer for deciding to say "cleared for active duty". If he was fit for duty, they have a defense and he doesn't. If he was unfit for duty, he has a defense and theirs depends on how obvious it was. From what they're saying his condition was, they don't have one. This is precisely the sort of thing that's the reason why we prefer to be conservative in when we clear people for duty. PTSD is a "no". TBI is a "hell no". When someone has had a blow to the head, the reasonable thing to do is to rotate them back home for an MRI, including at least a diffusion weighted image, and rotate them out again with the next batch if it turns up fine. If something is important enough to have people risking their lives and killing for it, it's most certainly important enough to merit the highest standards of medical care, and a conservative strategy in deciding when someone is fit for active duty. Never mind all the issues of service, defense and whatever else we may ascribe to the frontline soldier. It comes down to this one simple thing: we say this is worth lives, but sure as hell don't act like it is. Health, al-Aswad.

Aswad -> RE: U.S. Serviceman shoots Afghan civilians (3/17/2012 9:58:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle The only thing that might cause this thug to be sentenced severely is that his actions have screwed up the West's exit strategy in Afghanistan. Actually, it has prompted Karzai to request an early withdrawal. This year, as opposed to the planned exit in 2014. The troops are not best pleased. No way is Karzai in a position to hold Afghanistan without reverting to violent oppression, if even that will help. Don't know what the Taliban's position on this is, but I can't imagine they're happy about it, or that it will help our negotiations with them. Pakistan is a graver tactical concern. They already have severe factioning in their intelligence community, among other things, and some factions back radical groups against us. Those are gaining power and influence every time we screw up, and we lose influence with the groups that are nominally aligned with us. Now we either stay while not welcome according to the regime we put in place, or leave. And regardless of which we choose, we lose ground with some groups in Pakistan. To make matters worse, we don't have a clear enough picture of which will hurt us more in the long run. Again, that's the tactical side of things only, although it stands to reason that a tactically poor choice will have an increased probability of leading to a future confrontation which will see the whole farce repeated, with even less potential gain and even more difficulties. quote: Did I hear any one say "the sanctity of life" or "human rights" or "killing innocent civilians"? I thought not. While I'm not sure whether I said it outright, the former and latter are certainly implied. This is no accident. It's mass murder. Accidents happen. Wars have civilian losses. That is an essentially accepted cost of war. But mass murder is not. That's why we have conventions of war, rules of engagement and codes of conduct. As far as I can tell, all three were violated in killing these innocent civilians (there, said it). And someone needs to answer for it, whether it's him, the doc that cleared him, his CO, or the people in charge of doctrine on these matters. If doctrine supports it, those in charge of doctrine are responsible, and should answer for it. If the doc cleared him contrary to doctrine, he is responsible for gross negligence, and should answer for that. If he was cleared in line with doctrine, it comes down to whether he was competent. If he was, he's responsible for mass murder and needs to answer for it. At the moment, it seems exceedingly likely that more than one party should answer for this. And, sadly, exceedingly unlikely that anyone will. Health, al-Aswad.

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625