International Criminal Court to investigate British troops

Who do you think I am? How much importance do you believe I’ve got? I did not sanction that investigation, I didn’t ask for it to take place, I did not petition: I merely posted a link here that showed that an international investigation is to take place on top of the Iraq Historical Allegations Team’s investigation, started in 2010…

A more level-headed observer might conclude that some of you might have guilty consciences…

I’m sorry, but I literally have no idea what you are talking about; I think you may be responding to a post that wasn’t even directed at you (and I have avoided using the quote facility where possible)?

And talking of the quote function; could you possibly make several smaller post, rather than one large one, it will make it so much easier to use the quote function in return (without having to delete 95% of your post).

We have history on this point – don’t we ?

I know nothing about the mechanics of the distastful act you’ve mentioned. That doesn’t prevent me from weighing evidence when deciding culpability.

Yes, we do have a bit of history, but I don’t think we are at opposite ends of the spectrum.

I think your statement above outlines exactly how most rational people would approach any accusation of ‘wrongdoing’ by British Forces.

Re 34
CD

We have history on this point – don’t we ?

I know nothing about the mechanics of the distastful act you’ve mentioned. That doesn’t prevent me from weighing evidence when deciding culpability.

I know plenty about the mechanics of war in contrast to the trouble seeking socialists on this Forum who endlessly seek to make trouble wherever they can sense an opportunity to decry and impugn the valiant efforts of our Armed forces – don’t give them any more ‘ammunition’.

Re 33

Spitfireman

Excellent !

Snaffle…

I am not saying that no cases get investigated…there are good and bad eggs in every walk of life – but most cases with our lads are relatively minor…life is cheap in many countries around the world and some ordinary folk suffer far worse abuse from their own leaders and religious ‘leaders’…therefore the whole thing is one sided and unbalanced !

When I was out in zimbabwe in the 80’s – the locals just could not comprehend the personal freedom we enjoy here…political (or tribal if you wish) beatings/murders were a daily occurrence – and also just the threat of it was usually enough to ensure they toed the line and voted accordingly etc !
Western values are all well and good from the comfort of your living room – but the reality is somewhat different elsewhere !

Proper investigations by disinterested legal specialists are important where sufficient evidence warrants the investigation.

Neither Phil Shiner nor PIL meet any of the necessary criteria and have history as previously posted.

“More than a year after a public inquiry opened into claims that British troops in Iraq unlawfully killed up to 20 civilians, the central charge has now been withdrawn. Public Interest Lawyers (PIL), the human rights law firm acting for the families of the alleged victims, told the hearing that they now accepted that there was no evidence to substantiate the claims. So far some £22 million has been spent on the so-called al-Sweady inquiry, named after one of those who died. Opening in March last year, it has sat for 167 days and heard evidence from 280 witnesses.”

I am not holding my breath for anything to come out of the ICC investigation other than lots more money for the lawyers, indirectly paid for by us.

You can have as many opinions as you like but, if you’ve never smelt the gunpowder, your opinions are worthless because you have no personal experience…

I don’t suppose you have any experience of rape…..does that mean it isn’t wrong?

…You ever see the film A Few Food Men?

No, I didn’t have the stomach.

(#3 – I don’t think he likes civvies, full stop!)

Re 28

You can have as many opinions as you like but, if you’ve never smelt the gunpowder, your opinions are worthless because you have no personal experience.

The last time I dodged angry bullets plus the odd grenade, you were either in nappies or short trousers.

Your second question: Exactly how ‘high’ was your ‘higher education?’

Your third question: If you have to ask, then the obvious answer is wasted upon you.

I didn’t know that we ever had snaff – I have never heard of any army personnel wearing explosive vests or engaging in indiscriminate IED/bombing against soft civilian targets…the trouble is – in certain countries our guys are not fighting uniformed soldiers/troops etc which makes everything a tad more complicated !All an ‘irregular’ fighter has to do to become a ‘civilian’ is to throw away his weapon…not an easy situation for any troops to deal with.

Ok, big question #1 – what do you think this investigation is looking at?
No, our troops don’t wear explosive vests (except on nights out in fancy dress, obviously) blah blah blah. But then again our guys have already had experience of fighting an irregular force who wore civvies, although they had a much better, more coordinated, chain of command than those in Iraq or Afghanistan. If our troops start torturing detainees, as per the US troops at Abu Ghraib, do you think the world will sit back and think ‘there’s a really professional army?’ If our guys just detain people off the street just to hand out beatings before tossing them back in the gutter (something US troops did to relieve their boredom) do you think the locals would believe they were doing a fantastic job and prey for more power to their elbow?
Our troops are supposed to be civilised, from a civilised country; if the ‘uncivilised’ lot go about blowing themselves up, should we stoop to their level? If they plant IED’s, should our boys indiscriminately plant them too? If an irregular fighter throws his weapon away to become civilian again, do you advocate (as it appears from your post) that the all the civilians are therefore open to being gunned down because that is what these terrorists would do?

As I said before some investigations may be ok but the trouble is (and as with many things in life) they will go for the easy targets (ie our troops) when there is probably much worse violence going on all the time (and on a much larger scale) against women/children/their own people who are seen as belonging to different population control fiction factions !

Of course they will go for the easy targets – it is those easy targets who are being investigated!!!
This investigation is not a general one in to what has happened, it is investigating allegations about British troops – not Iraqis. Please read the link in the first post.

I would have thought that most patrol/small unit leaders would normally be SNCO’s or the senior survivor after an engagement !

Just like that marine patrol whose sergeant ‘executed’ that Taliban… Another black mark for the investigation – it might demonstrate that the troops are not ‘civilised’ and not under control.

humans make mistakes epecially when under stress and scared thats when abuse happens,it is not a part of policy. As for trolling i could hardly dare to match you, could i?

Humans do make mistakes, and I expect the investigation will investigate that or else it is not an investigation worth the name.
As for trolling, it doesn’t matter if you match or try to match me – coming in and throwing abuse is what you did, not taking part in the discussion.

Let me throw in my tuppenceworth.

Ok, just this once.
For this thread.
So that you can get it out of your system.
Because you repeat it every single time there is a thread which might question anything that possibly wears camo.

(I’ve seen an angry bullet. Someone drew an angry face on it…)

…if a group of Iraqi civilians dragged some British troops from their vehicles somewhere behind the ‘lines’ and hacked them to death what should my response be?

Gun them down, then hunt down their families and any witnesses and gun them down too, for revenge? I don’t know – I’ve not seen your most recent psych test.
I’ve got one for you: imagine an Iraqi prison, US soldiers in command, prisoners physically and sexually abused, tortured, raped, sodomized, and killed – for the pleasure of those soldiers. What would your response be IF it was found that similar things had been happening to people detained under British control?
Hey – you don’t need to imagine it! A few more for you to think about too…

Spring 2003: Gary Bartlam, a British soldier of the 7th Armoured Brigade, was arrested after submitting film to a photo developers shop in Tamworth, England while on leave. The photographs depict a gagged Iraqi POW suspended hanging by rope from a fork lift, and other pictures seem to show prisoners being forced to perform sexual acts. Bartlam and two other soldiers were convicted at court martial of abuse – a fourth soldier was cleared.
“Photos led to abuse convictions”. BBC News. 23 February 2005

May 2003: The Royal Military Police declared that Radhi Natna died of a heart attack while in British custody, yet his family reports that he had no heart trouble; and the Black Watch regiment arrested the 17-year-old Ahmad Jabber Kareem Ali in Basra, who then drowned after being ordered to swim across a river despite not being able to swim, according to his friend Ayad Salim Hanoon.
“18 Cases That Need Answers”, Tom Newton Dunn Daily Mirror. 5 May 2004

September 2003: Corporal Donald Payne of the Queen’s Lancashire Regiment now the 1st Battalion, Duke of Lancaster’s Regiment (King’s, Lancashire and Border), became Britain’s first convicted war criminal after pleading guilty to abusing Iraqi detainees, which resulted in the death of detainee Baha Mousa.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6609237.stm

In addition: Amnesty International claimed that British soldiers had killed innocent civilians who were no threat, had kicked a prisoner to death and that the British military did not investigate the abuses appropriately
http://web.archive.org/web/20050514024519/http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE140192004?open&of=ENG-IRQ

It was claimed that eleven Iraqis had been severely beaten by members of the SAS in Majar al Kabir; they were released and paid compensation for their injuries
“18 Cases That Need Answers”, Tom Newton Dunn Daily Mirror. 5 May 2004

In your world-view, whatever my opinion, I’d be wrong and those Iraqi civilians would be right.

Who do you think I am? How much importance do you believe I’ve got? I did not sanction that investigation, I didn’t ask for it to take place, I did not petition: I merely posted a link here that showed that an international investigation is to take place on top of the Iraq Historical Allegations Team’s investigation, started in 2010…
A more level-headed observer might conclude that some of you might have guilty consciences…;o)

Only reason is so that PIL can line their pockets with yet more taxpayers money under the guise of ‘righting wrongs’.

If you can’t stand behind our troops, feel free to stand in front of them….

So you are not interested in making sure that there is absolutely no substance to the allegations, not interested in clearing the good name of our military? You are happy that our ‘boys’ get the same sort of international reputation that the US military has acquired through diligently believing that they never do any wrong, whatsoever?

Where can I find the door to your world of absolute morality ? I expect there to be a sign above the door reading “Fools Paradise”.

Number 10 for the latter, deffo… So you would rather be a terrorist than a ‘Worlds Policeman’? It might grind my teeth to even think it but do as you would be done by sets a good example, likewise an eye for an eye turns the whole world blind…

“We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm.”
George Orwell

…You ever see the film A Few Food Men? No? How about A Few Good Men (much better known)? No matter how good and proper your intentions, abuse (and more) does not make things good and proper. A wrong is still a wrong.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]228271[/ATTACH]

John Green #20 when was the last time you stood in harms way?

Do you advocate military dictatorship as the prefered form of Government?

If the answer to the above is no, how do you reconcile that position with your stance that non military folk must be allowed no opinion on military matters?

“We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm.”

George Orwell

Re 25

Where can I find the door to your world of absolute morality ? I expect there to be a sign above the door reading “Fools Paradise”.

Bob’s second sentence however……

What Bob is advocatiing is blind loyalty – regardless of what happens. If there are instances of abuse and war crimes what then? Should we still support the guilty?

If we want to continue to be the good guys and adopt the moral high ground then we must behave as such and any alleged abuses need to be investigated.
Any abuse acts as a recruitment tool for the enemy.

Bob – your first sentence. Precisely – see my post #9.

Only reason is so that PIL can line their pockets with yet more taxpayers money under the guise of ‘righting wrongs’.

If you can’t stand behind our troops, feel free to stand in front of them….

If you’ve never served in the Armed Forces in places where you can hear the sound of angry bullets, then your opinion on this and related matters is worthless.

But that is a knife (sword) that cuts both ways…

…if a group of Iraqi civilians dragged some British troops from their vehicles somewhere behind the ‘lines’ and hacked them to death what should my response be?

In your world-view, whatever my opinion, I’d be wrong and those Iraqi civilians would be right.

Re 18

Let me throw in my tuppenceworth. If you’ve never served in the Armed Forces in places where you can hear the sound of angry bullets, then your opinion on this and related matters is worthless.