 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
I have always had a strong feeling for this case and justice have been done, whats your view? Before someone judges a person, they should try walking a mile in their shoes, it is not easy being on a battlefield, quick descicions have to be made  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ara JTV/TS
over a year ago
Bristol East |
I don't know much about this case.
But I have had some flings lately with ex-military types who served in Iraq, Somalia, Afghanistan and Bosnia.
The general impression I got chatting to them was one of soldiers being asked to be police officers in a foreign land.
That struck me as unfair on the soldiers - it's not what they are trained for.
Chap last night was telling me about a colleague who got drummed out in disgrace for shooting men who were gang-raping a woman in Somalia.
The soldiers had been told it was not illegal there, so not to intervene.
That must be very very hard. This soldier ignored that and decided to mete out his own justice.
The Army is a blunt instrument. It is not a police force. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"I don't know much about this case.
But I have had some flings lately with ex-military types who served in Iraq, Somalia, Afghanistan and Bosnia.
The general impression I got chatting to them was one of soldiers being asked to be police officers in a foreign land.
That struck me as unfair on the soldiers - it's not what they are trained for.
Chap last night was telling me about a colleague who got drummed out in disgrace for shooting men who were gang-raping a woman in Somalia.
The soldiers had been told it was not illegal there, so not to intervene.
That must be very very hard. This soldier ignored that and decided to mete out his own justice.
The Army is a blunt instrument. It is not a police force."
Yes, it must be hard for the army to know what to do in those situations. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I don't know much about this case.
But I have had some flings lately with ex-military types who served in Iraq, Somalia, Afghanistan and Bosnia.
The general impression I got chatting to them was one of soldiers being asked to be police officers in a foreign land.
That struck me as unfair on the soldiers - it's not what they are trained for.
Chap last night was telling me about a colleague who got drummed out in disgrace for shooting men who were gang-raping a woman in Somalia.
The soldiers had been told it was not illegal there, so not to intervene.
That must be very very hard. This soldier ignored that and decided to mete out his own justice.
The Army is a blunt instrument. It is not a police force.Yes, it must be hard for the army to know what to do in those situations."
They could try following orders, especially if it's a case of inaction rather than action.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ara JTV/TS
over a year ago
Bristol East |
"How can it be legal in any country for a group of men to r*pe a woman ?  "
It surprised me, too.
The again, until quite recently, it was quite legitimate for a man in this country to r@pe a woman, so long as he had a piece stating she was his wife.
Perhaps this is similar, and extends the privilege to others beyond just the husband.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"How can it be legal in any country for a group of men to r*pe a woman ? "
It depends how r*pe is legally defined and what is legally considered Consent. There are many things in this country which are now legally defined as r*pe but wouldn't have been less than 30 years ago. Two examples spring to mind.
A husband forcing his wife to have sex with him. 30 years that was his legal right, now it's r*pe.
A woman having sex with an under age mail. 30 years that wasn't illegal (the law assumed any man was consensual to sex with a woman) now it's r*pe. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I'm sorry to say this but he was and is guilty and is a bloody disgrace to the uniform.
It is not the action of shooting per say that was and would be a crime at any time. It was the hubris of feeling that he was totally above the law and could boast of his crime as he commited it knowing he was being recorded that is unforgivable. In his arrogance rather than claiming that the man he shot seemed to make a threatening move and thus justifying his action he bigged himself up he told the men in his charge that he had just committed a war crime. In that moment he increased the danger for every member of the armed forces and every British and Western person around the world. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The Army is a blunt instrument. It is not a police force."
You have that totally wrong (although I understand your mistake).
Armies are very sharp instruments, in fact they even have 'spearhead units'. It is the police who are the blunt instruments...
Soldiers get bayonets (and other pointy things) for close quarters combat...
Police get truncheons and sticks...
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I'm sorry to say this but he was and is guilty and is a bloody disgrace to the uniform.
It is not the action of shooting per say that was and would be a crime at any time. It was the hubris of feeling that he was totally above the law and could boast of his crime as he commited it knowing he was being recorded that is unforgivable. In his arrogance rather than claiming that the man he shot seemed to make a threatening move and thus justifying his action he bigged himself up he told the men in his charge that he had just committed a war crime. In that moment he increased the danger for every member of the armed forces and every British and Western person around the world."
You see, I do sometimes agree with you. Especially when you're on a subject you clearly know and understand. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"I'm sorry to say this but he was and is guilty and is a bloody disgrace to the uniform.
It is not the action of shooting per say that was and would be a crime at any time. It was the hubris of feeling that he was totally above the law and could boast of his crime as he commited it knowing he was being recorded that is unforgivable. In his arrogance rather than claiming that the man he shot seemed to make a threatening move and thus justifying his action he bigged himself up he told the men in his charge that he had just committed a war crime. In that moment he increased the danger for every member of the armed forces and every British and Western person around the world."
I agree but without the conviction of experience.
I can understand that under intense stress people lose control and "things happen".
His comments indicate that was not the case here. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
