Really? Strange how so many members of our armed forces have medals for bravery and courage.
Royal Marine found guilty of Afghanistan murder
- Thread starter rednev
- Start date
Really? Strange how so many members of our armed forces have medals for bravery and courage.
A cowardly, hidden enemy? They opened fire on a patrol of an army which is currently occupying their country, they're not running around blowing up British kids in the UK. Our troops then brought in air support and neutralised the two people firing.
The Taliban are an appalling group but did we really think they were going to take an invasion lying down? Why would they? What populations in history take invasions lying down? Especially the Afghans?
And as a matter of fact, I have been in military situations. My country was in civil war for 10 years. And I saw people doing pretty horrendous things when they've lost their humanity and when the person in front of them is a cockroach, a non-human to be squashed and exterminated. This is the stage which that marine has reached. And I imagine that this is the stage that this cowardly, hidden enemy has reached, having most likely seen some pretty horrible things committed by these foreigners in his country as well.
The Taliban are an appalling group but did we really think they were going to take an invasion lying down? Why would they? What populations in history take invasions lying down? Especially the Afghans?
And as a matter of fact, I have been in military situations. My country was in civil war for 10 years. And I saw people doing pretty horrendous things when they've lost their humanity and when the person in front of them is a cockroach, a non-human to be squashed and exterminated. This is the stage which that marine has reached. And I imagine that this is the stage that this cowardly, hidden enemy has reached, having most likely seen some pretty horrible things committed by these foreigners in his country as well.
Marching mustn't understand the concept of overwhelming force. If faced with that you use what tactics available to you. It's all horrible, but using it as an excuse for this cnut who executed an unarmed enemy combatant is nothing short of a disgrace.
You have no fecking idea what I do or do not understand. I have my opinion and you have yours. We will have to disagree about certain things.
You're trying to partially justify what this man did by saying he did it to a cowardly enemy soldier.
Am I wrong?
I am saying it is impossible for those not in this soldiers position to appreciate what goes through their minds and the pressure they are under. I have not said he should not have been prosecuted or punished.
There is no doubt that an enemy that plants IED's and hides behind local villagers to escape are cowards.
I was under the impression that he got injured and captured assaulting a military base, not planting IEDs or hiding behind civilians. You may not be justifying the soldier's act, but in your very first post you said you "hope they don't go overboard with his sentence", on account of what he has gone through. Do you have no such sympathy for the people in the war-torn country that has been (or is being) occupied by a foreign military that may or may not have made the situation any better?
Also, without drawing any direct comparisons, you may as well have called the French Resistance cowards, or Soviet Partisans, or, if it had come to that, "Dad's Army". They were all (or was going to be, in the case of the Home Guard) guerilla forces who hid among civilians. Their cause might have been ultimately nobler, but tell that to the people who are seeing their country torn apart in Afghanistan. Whether or not their response is the correct one, they obviously feel that way. As someone said earlier in the thread, the current Taliban probably aren't even the people who started the war.
Also, without drawing any direct comparisons, you may as well have called the French Resistance cowards, or Soviet Partisans, or, if it had come to that, "Dad's Army". They were all (or was going to be, in the case of the Home Guard) guerilla forces who hid among civilians. Their cause might have been ultimately nobler, but tell that to the people who are seeing their country torn apart in Afghanistan. Whether or not their response is the correct one, they obviously feel that way. As someone said earlier in the thread, the current Taliban probably aren't even the people who started the war.
I accept all that, but in the same vain I hardly think soldiers hiding behind overwhelming weapons and technology fighting boys and men with antiquated guns are any less cowardly.
Edit: That's probably not the best wording I could have used. I'm not trying to say the soldiers out there fighting are cowards, but even if the enemy is using what you consider to be dirty tactics the British army should be held to a higher standard.
Whatever this person was doing he was the enemy and a huge part of their tactics are planting IED's and hiding themselves amongst civilians.
As for me wanting his sentence to take into account mitigating circumstances I stand by that. The same week this soldier was found guilty another was blown to bits by a suicide bomber. These men and women live every day not knowing whether the path you are walking is booby-trapped or the fact the soldiers see they colleagues body parts hung in trees ...do you really think they are not likely to make a mistake under all that pressure? This does not excuse what this particular soldier did but IMO it does suggest a reason and like in any other case it has to be taken into account.
I also have enormous sympathy for the good people of the area who hate the Taliban as much as I and maybe even you.
They are. That's why this guy has been put on trial and will be punished. IMO the circumstances are not as black & white as you paint them though.
They're certainly not black and white, and these guys do operate under extreme stress in these war zones, and I think the army for deserve plaudits for their stance and actions here.
Marching, what's wrong with IED's as weapons of warfare? The fact that they are responsible for two-thirds of western deaths in these countries? I can understand as someone who is a soldier or feels for some reason sympathetic to the plight of their jobs would hate IED's, but the truth is they're the most effective weapon the invaded people have, and even using them frequently they still don't cause a fraction of the deaths that coalition weapons cause. "We" were using mines for quite some time, weren't we? How were they any different. Except that now we don't need them as we have more precise weapons and don't need to risk the collateral damage. It's great dictating the rules about what's fair or not in a war when you've got so many winning strategies to chose - unlike your enemy, which is expected to abide by these rules that would make warfare an easy pisstake for their opponents if they were followed.
Coward? Because it's hidden, unexpected, and the victims can do little to nothing about it?
You mean like drone attacks, bombings, or being run down by superiorly equipped and trained forces and outnumbered?
There's some arrogant self-righteousness about your use of the word cowards. That man that was shot by the Marine may have lack many things like brains, possibly a heart (I wouldn't know about this though) but he certainly didn't lack balls.
Coward? Because it's hidden, unexpected, and the victims can do little to nothing about it?
You mean like drone attacks, bombings, or being run down by superiorly equipped and trained forces and outnumbered?
There's some arrogant self-righteousness about your use of the word cowards. That man that was shot by the Marine may have lack many things like brains, possibly a heart (I wouldn't know about this though) but he certainly didn't lack balls.
IED's is just the buzz word for weapons that have been used for years. The allies even use them with booby traps and trip wires.
This is probably not the thread for this discussion though so I'm out.
This is probably not the thread for this discussion though so I'm out.
I agree with Marching here. Well, atleast the bit where he says that none of us really know the kind of pressure and stress the soldiers are under. I am not saying what the soldier did was right but I can see what may have made him do it.
If he has watched the Taliban day in and day out killing his fellow soldiers and treating them in such brutal manner as hanging their limbs and stuff of trees, there must be such level of hatred and anger built up in the soldier that it is hard to keep your emotions in check.
If he has watched the Taliban day in and day out killing his fellow soldiers and treating them in such brutal manner as hanging their limbs and stuff of trees, there must be such level of hatred and anger built up in the soldier that it is hard to keep your emotions in check.
War turns people into psychopaths, so incidents like this will always happen. But the law isn't in any position to be lenient about something like this.
Even if it's not forgiven, you can at least understand how frustrating it must be to be on the only side who plays by the rules (in general). Al-Qaeda and the Taliban hardly abide by the Geneva Convention.
It's a hard one this.
He shouldn't have done it, he knows he shouldn't, he admitted as much on the tape. Situations like this is the main reason why the army has a military court. They are the best ones to hand down a sentence, they will know his history, mental state, pervious fighting experience etc. What ever sentence he gets will be a fair one.
It must be a difficult situation to be in, I have a bit of sympathy for the solider, after all he killed a terrorist not a civilian, how many lives did he save by killing that one man? However he has rules to follow and going by the tapes it seemed like he was in a clear state of mind at the time of the killing.
He shouldn't have done it, he knows he shouldn't, he admitted as much on the tape. Situations like this is the main reason why the army has a military court. They are the best ones to hand down a sentence, they will know his history, mental state, pervious fighting experience etc. What ever sentence he gets will be a fair one.
It must be a difficult situation to be in, I have a bit of sympathy for the solider, after all he killed a terrorist not a civilian, how many lives did he save by killing that one man? However he has rules to follow and going by the tapes it seemed like he was in a clear state of mind at the time of the killing.
Surprised by that post? Not a bit.
He killed a terrorist? How do you know? Was he positively identified as a terrorist? All I've read is that he attacked a military installation, which is as legitimate a target as any. If that makes him a terrorist, then the soldier is surely one too, and he isn't even in his own country.
Ok then an enemy. An enemy in a war, if that makes you happier. He may have saved his colleagues lives in the future by killing him. Saying that I don't believe that thought even entered his head, it's just the way I see the situation siting from the comfort of my home.
He shouldn't have done it, and will have to serve his time in a military prison. Does he regret it? I'm sure he does.
Seems unlikely, I doubt that when we capture war prisoners we just let them out the week after.
That's true actually, never thought of that
Sgt Al Blackman heard today he has lost his appeal to have his murder conviction overturned, however his minimum term sentence was reduced from 10 to 8 years.
http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/Mar...loses-murder/story-21127038-detail/story.html
http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/Mar...loses-murder/story-21127038-detail/story.html
Tomorrow (28th October) there will be a show of support in Parliament Square for Sgt Al Blackman. In Routine Daily Orders, Military Chiefs have warned serving personnel they face disciplinary action if they attend the event.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...rsonnel-mass-rally-support-jailed-marine.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...rsonnel-mass-rally-support-jailed-marine.html
Been refused bail this afternoon. Obviously his fans are taking it as well as you'd expect.
He murdered someone and is paying the price for that. The people showing support for him are acting despicably and despite their stupid misguided beliefs are also going against the best interests of the military.
That's a top point Nev.
Really don't understand the controversy over this conviction.
Misguided patriotism/jingoism..?
I imagine we'd have the same demonstrations here, especially in red states.
There are swarms of people that only need to hear the murmur of "Marine" "Army" "Military" and they will defend their action to the hilt, regardless of what they have done.
Technically the soldier is in the wrong but under the circumstances it maybe somewhat understandable. He's captured an enemy that by the sounds of it has been executing members of the soldiers unit (not personally). What he's done here while breaking the geneva convention is answering in kind.
You can't fight a war with kid gloves either. You also have to ask if Taliban POW are rehabilitable. Because they aren't.
While true, the seeming fact that he told the rest of his company he was aware he was breaking the Geneva Convention and that they shouldn't mention it is just a little bit damning.
There haven't ever been any demonstrations over Al, just very peaceful shows of support.
That's what I mean by demonstrations. Not implying a riot.
He has always said he thought the insurgent was dead, he had been hit by Apache fire. Desecrating an enemy's corpse is also against the Geneva Convention, hence the reference to it.
Would make the poetic bit about letting go of his moral bonds a bit redundant then wouldn't it?
Ah right, sorry I misunderstood your post. The campaign to free Al has always been very careful to veer away from the word demonstration.
Not necessarily, if he had just died and it was a quote that sprung to mind at that moment.
I'm not saying he shouldn't have shot the insurgent, but there were circumstances over that 6 month tour that weren't properly taken into consideration, hence the upcoming new appeal hearing ordered by the Criminal Cases Review Commission after a year long review into his case.
Especially when the other side is somehow connected with terrorism or insurgency. No holds barred then for some people.
Well he had just shot him and I don't seem to remember 'you cnut' being at the end of that quote when we read Hamlet in secondary school. Prior to that he'd also asked whether anyone wanted to perform first aid on him. Admittedly my first aid training was brief and over a decade ago but I think I'm right in saying it can't bring back the dead.
Last edited:
Technically I think you can, ie the heart and lungs have stopped and you can keep working until you resusitate their heart and their breathing again.
Not that this is the likely scenario here.