Should There Be A Lenient Sentance For Marine A

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/10454622/Marine-A-poll-finds-47-want-a-lenient-sentence.html

47% want a lenient sentence and 35 per cent believe the marine should receive a full life sentence for his crime.

/// Support for a more lenient sentence was highest among the over 55s, with more than half of those aged 55-64 saying that the law should make an exception for a serving soldier. Among the over 65s, some 55 per cent would support leniency. ///

It would be interesting to see a vote taken of amongst those who have actually served in Afghanistan, it is only those who know what pressures are involved when you fight those who do not wear any uniform of recognition.

[anotheoldgit]

Zacs-Master

/// AOG. Your solution isn't worthy of comment.///

Could that be because who can't come up with a reasonable counter argument?

[jim360]

Easy counter-argument, actually: History. Nothing has ever managed to stop violence for long, least of all yet more violence. Best we can do is to sort out our own house, make sure at least someone is doing the right thing.

[bazwillrun]

"Best we can do is to sort out our own house, make sure at least someone is doing the right thing. "

yeah great idea...then everybody else who doesnt want to obey the rules walks all over us whilst laughing at us.

bit like the eussr, seems like france, italy etc ignore what they want but we walk the line like good little eurofanbius

[anotheoldgit]

THECORBYLOON

/// ANOTHEOLDGIT, do you agree that the Geneva Conventions should be observed by members of HMF? ///

IO do not know enough of the Geneva Conventional rules to give a yes, no answer.

But I see this conflict as not a real 'act of war' where there are two or more groups of armed forces either side of a conflict, all wearing a recognisable uniform, flying flags and other symbols of recognisable on their vehicles etc, so that they are instantly recognisable to each other.

Here we have one side that hides their identity under the guise as civilians, and who are not signatories to any rules of warfare, so their is an argument why we should be the side that is restricted to rules?

Surely you would not think it fair, if you yourself were taking part in a game where only your side had to obey the rules, would you?

[anotheoldgit]

/// Best we can do is to sort out our own house, make sure at least someone is doing the right thing. ///

Bet Jim would think the same if he was playing darts down at his pub, and his opponent beat him every time because he was using four darts instead of three and was also fixing the score board.

[sandyRoe]

Was what these German soldiers did to British troops a war crime? Should they have been excused because it happened shortly after the heat of battle?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_Paradis_massacre

[THECORBYLOON]

ANOTHEOLDGIT, when you were in the RAF, did you obey orders or did you just pick and choose? What would have happened during the war if discipline had broken down and pilots started dropping bombs as and when they felt like it regardless of the target?

[jim360]

Under those circumstances I'd stop playing dart with him, but it's not really comparable is it?

[Sqad]

On the spur of the moment, in a state of excitable self preservation, not knowing the full situation, awareness of the danger of your enemy however injured............are you in danger..........could he kill you?

This is war....a particularly nasty war......this is not Thorpe park Road in a leafy suburb of Hertfordshire. War and peace, two separate disciplines.

You have to do, what you are trained to do and what your conscience tells you at that particular moment at that particularly time in a situation that very few will find themselves confronted.

He should not serve one day.

i agree i wasn't there at the time and i do not know the full situation.

[jim360]

Listen to the recording of what happened, Sqad. Then you'll see that it wasn't heat of the moment at all. They even said straight afterwards that they knew what they had done was wrong (or at least that it broke the Geneva Convention) and that they should keep quiet. That at least is in violation of their training.

[Sqad]

Jim...OK.

[Zacs-Master]

But he wasn't 'in a state of excitable self preservation'. Have you read the evidence? It was a cool calm and collected assassination with a degree of detachment evidenced by the commentary.

[THECORBYLOON]

Are soldiers trained to murder those who are badly injured and when it is three against one SQUAD?

[sandyRoe]

Has anyone ever considered that, if for nothing else, he deserves a long sentence for stupidity? To have recorded himself in the act of murder must show that he isn't exactly the sharpest knife in the box.

[Sqad]

CORBYLOON...

I personally have had no experience of war and my post was based on hearsay....the hearsay from two of my four sons, one was in the SAS and the other in the Marines, both seeing active service in the Gulf War and Northern Ireland.

They are trained to ascertain that the enemy is "destabilised" not posing a threat...."by any and every means possible."

[bazwillrun]

"Has anyone ever considered that, if for nothing else, he deserves a long sentence for stupidity? To have recorded himself in the act of murder must show that he isn't exactly the sharpest knife in the box. "


i'm sure you'll be brave enought to tell him face to face that hes not that bright

[anotheoldgit]

sandyRoe

/// Was what these German soldiers did to British troops a war crime? Should they have been excused because it happened shortly after the heat of battle? ///

No what they did was unlawful, but I do believe that during WW2 if a serviceman was out of uniform ie pretending to be a civilian on the other sides territory, it was quite in order for them to be shot as a spy.

[anotheoldgit]

THECORBYLOON

/// ANOTHEOLDGIT, when you were in the RAF, did you obey orders or did you just pick and choose? What would have happened during the war if discipline had broken down and pilots started dropping bombs as and when they felt like it regardless of the target? ///

For starters it was not up to the pilot to drop the bombs only to fly the aircraft to the target area.

But what you suggested often happened either because, one could not see the drop zone due to poor visibility or because the aircraft was damaged and one had to discharge the bombs so as to gain height.

[Zeuhl]

/If we had lowered ourselves to their standards in the first place, this horrific conflict could have been over years ago, along with some of those who have lost their lives, still being alive today.

What can be bad about that? /

What? apart from it being unworkable, stupid and nauseating?

Let's assess aog's plan shall we?

British forces will snatch random civilians from villages suspected of helping the Taliban and British soldiers will shoot them and their families in cold blood

British soldiers will place anti-personnel mines on paths where Taliban may walk - any civilian casualties will be ignored

British forces will expect volunteers to explode suicide bombs in village markets or will force civilians to wear suicide vests while their children are held at gunpoint by British soldiers

Of course, we could also lower ourselves to the Taliban level by the indiscriminate firing of missiles, dropping of bombs from a not-so-brave safe distance of a aircraft cockpit or drone control centre and kill off the Afghan civilians that way

Questions:

do you honestly think the majority of decent minded British service people would tolerate aog's plan?

do you think it would create a genuine victory? the lessons of recent history suggest not.

The main problem (and some ABers clearly can't comprehend this) is that our repulsion at ideas such as aog's or the cold blooded murder of wounded enemy combatants has nothing to do with what the Taliban think of us. Sod them.

It is about what we think of ourselves.

aog and others may think we are no better than the Taliban

most of us know different
This is about