Been down for a while – broken computer. Not sure how stable it is now though. Did you miss me?

For the sake of Charlie I won’t answer every post, but I shall pick a few out…

I too, do not believe that soldiers should, under any circumstances surrender. Fight to the last bullet, run away and live to fight another day. The howls of outrage are predictable.

So, in your limited experience of warfare, you would have shot every prospective prisoner?
But what about those wounded soldiers slaughtered by the Japanese in hospitals? Should they have committed suicide rather than allow themselves to be put in a position where they were left to the mercy of the Japanese soldiers?

According to reports we do not know whether the Taliban fighter had received a mortal wound at the hands of the Apache. A hit from a 30mm cannon shell is hardly survivable.

We also do not know if he had suffered from shrapnel wounds or was even just pretending. Either way it doesn’t matter much now since he was put down without investigation…

Tony, I’m sure that you of all people know that there is more than a strong whiff of PC about this verdict. The infection has spread into the most unlikely areas. Who would have thought that our Armed forces, once the bastion of skill and robust excellence, have now been subsumed into the disasterous code of equal opportunity, risk averse, welfare codling.

Gosh, John. You are desperate.
Who would have thought that our armed forces, once regarded around the world as being fair and respectful, would have descended into the depraved depths that we once thought only possible from terrorists, murderers, and the sort of armies who have no truck with the Geneva Convention?

Totally agree with you John, indeed it can have a negative effect, it could have troops on the ground second guessing their actions when they are borderline, and that gets folks killed. It also brings to the fore issues about prisoners, as an example, say you have in a hypothetical sense, troops (SAS etc) operating behind the lines and they are stumbled upon by some opposition guards who after a firefight one surrenders immediately, what do you do with him, you cannot take them with you, nor can you leave them behind you where they can alert more forces and compromise your mission.
Then you have to define murder, this Terry Taliban was injured, OK, say you sneak upon a position and there is a guard sitting on a wall who has previously been wounded, his weapon is resting beside him propped up against the wall so he is strictly unarmed, does killing this unarmed wounded insurgent not merit the same charge of murder? Yes you can argue he had a weapon within reach, but then you could also argue the one in the trial may of had too.

Different situation, Tony. It is not a case of dragging an injured man out of sight of witnesses and telling your mates not to say anything because you’ve committed a crime.

Murdered in cold blood,OK if that makes you happy. So what was the alternative?Call in a Medivac chopper or ground medics.

They could have bought lottery tickets – the chances must be very similar…

Re 369

And so they should. We won. But, the price paid by my family and hundreds of thousands of others was excessive.

Everybody suffers in war. Which film had it that truth was the first casualty?
We won then, but are we winning now? And if we aren’t winning then doesn’t that give them the right to charge us with war crimes like we did the Nazis and Japanese?

Re 371

Yes, that’s right. One has to be there to smell the cordite to become informed.

Sorry – what war were you in again?
I can smell something around here, but it isn’t cordite.

Do I care if one Taliban gets slotted or people die in this country for its continued production. I think you know my answer.

Wait until one of your relatives dies from their drug addiction – maybe your answer will be different then?

Re 406

I’m informed that you are possibly delusional !

Please post your source – remember that Wiki does not count.

If you don’t know you can always make it up.

Ah-ha! Is that how you do it, John?

Re 414

The report that I read said that he had been wounded by a 30mm round from an Apache helicopter. The impact of this ordnance is, usually, non survivable. If the wound sustained isn’t mortal then the shock and loss of blood usually are.

But if they were not all that bothered about checking him over how do you know? As I said above, he could have suffered shrapnel wounds, not as fatal as a direct hit from a marines pistol let alone an Apaches gun, but just as open to letting the blood visibly flow.

Re 425

Yes, like everything you write, it’s quite true, the camera doesn’t lie – does it ?

It depends on your point of view, I suppose; it doesn’t lie if it gives credence to your argument. On the other hand, if it shows someone being shot then I guess you need to justify that action if it goes against your position.

John, why don’t you tell us how the camera lied on this occasion…

You should hear what he says about you…;o)

A smile to my face – both Charlie and Linc moaning about my posts on the marine execution thread!

And my daughter at Sing&Rhyme this morning, dancing along to Twinkle Twinkle Little Star whilst keeping well out of the mosh pit full of other year old’s!

Not balls to the wall, then?

Expect Putin will catch up on CCTV.

The year or the movie?

If its the year then I suppose so… Something from when you were courting, Linc?;o)

Snafu – you win!! I surrender…..I can’t wake up to endless scrolling on my phone anymore……
My only observation trying to connect what you said with posts a day earlier is that you seem to be confusing Iraq and Afghanistan in your replies…….but please don’t try to clarify. The white flag flutters in the morning breeze!:)

Not confusing the two, using the experience of one as an exemplar for the other. They are different, but not so different as to be useless for such an exercise.

Charles, I did try – but only the once – to view this thread on my mobile. I must say I admire your spirit but you must get yourself a real computer or fall behind…;o)

I agree with Longshot and indeed was going to post similar…the horrors of war affect people very deeply…does SNAFU actually believe that anybody comes back from that sort of combat with no psychological damage ??

Hmm. Why not ask him?

As I said previously…not many here are qualified to comment on this case…How many people could honestly say how they would react to seeing their comrades body parts hung in trees and the after effects of IED’s etc.
Careful you do not fall off your High Horse !

If not many are qualified to comment on this case what about you – qualified or not?

The fact is that soldiers join a military establishment. That establishment can be expected to practice its trade at the drop of a hat. Yes, if they come across body parts hanging in a tree they might well be shook up, but they need to be brave, bite the bullet and have a talk with their MO rather than bottle it up and pretend that they are ‘real’ men and therefore are unaffected.
The reason the body bits were put in the tree was almost certainly to psych-out other soldiers – so it has apparently worked and could well now be used again and again in order to upset more troops.

Anyone remember the explosion at Horse Guards Parade in 1982? Bodies of Blues and Royal troopers and their horses were scattered about after a car bomb blew nails and other shrapnel through them. The man who was riding Sefton, the horse that was badly injured but survived to become horse of the year, killed his two young children and then committed suicide last year, after his second marriage broke down, with claims that his ongoing trauma from the bombing left him severely depressed, which was a major cause of the tragedy. Yes, psychological damage – both from combat and incidents like terrorist bombings – is something to be considered and dealt with; maybe in the future one of the financial incentives over going to war or taking up an international policing role such as Afghanistan might be the cost of the long term medical support required for the psychologically damaged troops.

The problem is that arguably they are well aware and trained as to the sorts of horror they might encounter and secondly where is the line of mitigation to be drawn? I think I could find a spontaneous act easier to understand than a calculated one.

Are they well enough trained though? How do you train for finding a buddies body in a tree?
That said the police, firefighters and ambulance personnel can and do come across traumatic incidents occasionally, without having the need to commit illegal acts to cope with the pressure.

Yes, exactly but the ‘others’ must already have these similar objectives!

Good grief.
For ‘similar objectives’ think ‘killing those who disagree with them’. It is not something exclusive to Afghanistan.

If a home-grown suicide-bomber says he wants British Forces out of Afghanistan to ‘impress’ other armed terrorist groups then these other armed terrorist groups must already want British Forces out of Afghanistan.

Why?

Therefore it is not an isolated demand; therefore it proves, does it not, that having British Forces in Afghanistan makes Britain a target?

So if having British Forces in Afghanistan makes Britain a target…

…how can having British Forces in Afghanistan make Britain safer?

Um, yes. Ok.
You said something similar last night and I’m still not sure what you are on about or where you are going with this.

No, I don’t think you can make it work for any financial reason; the ‘war’ simply costs more than any financial return those (USA / UK / others) who financed the ‘war’ would ever get out.

What Britain has always done with its ‘excess’ soldiers (submarines, aircraft-carriers, fighter-bombers, armoured divisions and nuclear missiles)…

…I’d train them to be as effective a deterrent force as possible for a war that I hope they never have to fight.

There are hundreds of former soldiers employed by private security company’s – like the former Blackwater – working on million dollar contracts to defend American military installations and/or embassy’s in places like Iraq, Libya, and Afghanistan already, and they are not restricting themselves to ex US military personnel – ex British army Fijians and Gurkha’s have been in action in the last few years with Academi (ex Blackwater). The defunct Sandline and other ‘mercenary’ units have been happy to employ redundant soldiers to guard diamond mines or try and overthrow the odd nation or other…

The excess soldiers are redundant soldiers – not redeployed soldiers.

…so how can sending British Forces to Afghanistan protect us against that?

No idea. Thank goodness I am not in favour of it…

snafu, I would like to reply, in the same vein as you, but my end is drawing nigh, and I may well be dead before I finish my plethora of a reply, to equal the length of yours.

I am flagging here – just noticed that this post was at the bottom of page 9 with the (current) last post somewhere on page 12!
My head is aching and I wish I had a drink to dull the pain.

Maybe some of those posts are you and Charlie shooting the breeze…! (Just looked and was pleased to see that’s the case – at least for some of it…)

British when they want something from the state!

Being British to me is supporting my country right or wrong,if you don’t like it leave. I don’t expect special treatment on political or religious grounds and I don’t expect any half baked nit wits to pussyfoot around me nor do I expect any minorities to get special treatment either. Live here obey the laws contribute to society and turn in the trouble makers to the authorities is all I ask.

If you support your country, right or wrong… what are you going on about?;o)

Cynics might think that Snafu’s lengthy replies are a means of obfuscation rather than clarification. I find them interesting though. Do please feel free to continue.

Thanks.

I just shan’t be looking, that’s all!:)

Ha, wanna put money on it?

Yup, I recon they ought to make a battery which clearly states, “Guaranteed snafu proof” right to the end of his threads…..:D

My phone lasts for over a day on standby – which is good.
But its a Windows phone – you really don’t want a Windows phone…

Notwithstanding that, there some on this forum who’ve seen fit to vent their spleen against a section of our Armed Forces having never themselves stood closer to an explosion than lighting a banger on Guy Fawkes Night. That makes them not only ignorant but stupid. What’s new !

I have never argued the merits of the case in question. I wrote in an earlier contribution that this was a matter for the Military Tribunal. My argument has always been with the ‘qualifications’ of those who can see only one side of the situation and are not prepared to accept that active military service life is very different from that comfortable armchair that most of these ‘warriors’ inhabit and while they may have an opinion, it is only an opinion and not based on any fact.

I say again…[ATTACH=CONFIG]222878[/ATTACH]

And again I ask if no one is qualified then how can you judge anything?
The members of the court martial shouldn’t have been able to judge those marines because they had never been involved with murdering anybody? No one should try to become an MP because they’ve never been an MP before? Don’t become a soldier unless you’ve been a soldier already? No one should make a first comment on a forum because they have never made a comment before?
Think of all those wonderful things we would have missed out on if we had followed your ideal!

Obviously you, John, have been involved with murder and therefore you should be the only one to comment on this case?

Get real.

Re 183

Of all the infantile tosh ! “You spoke to a squaddie..” So now you’re an expert The next time I see a swallow, I’ll know that it is summertime.

Don’t ask for a translation.

Ah ha – we have an expert on swallows! Wonder who John spoke to…?

Seriously, Trumper spoke to a ‘squaddie’ who expressed a view which is contrary to yours, and we have spoken to you, another squaddie (of sorts). Whats the difference? Other than you think that your view should trump all others, obviously.

Still, freedom of speech and all that, eh?

Re 184

Of all the most gormless comments, that clearly takes the biscuit.

“Discuss and act as judge, jury and executioner – the British People?” I am incredulous. Most of them can’t properly read or write. So juries are not being discharged at huge expense because jurors cannot understand the evidence? That’s another fairy tale is it ?

The reason why Military Tribunals or Courts Martial are convened and staffed by Military Personnel is because it would be unfair to the accused to submit to adjudication by civilians because THEY DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE MILITARY.

And here’s me thinking that CD sometimes writes something sensible. I’m certainly wrong on that score.

John, speak to Paul178 – he believes in his country right or wrong. And you are obviously both right thinking people…

Re 206

I appreciate your concern. Temporarily missing performing house sitting and cat sitting duties. The cat in question is a lissom black tom cat that answers – when he feels like it – to the name of Harry. He has some unusual qualities and usually knows what I’m thinking. Like many felines he is good at contempt and bored resignation, Characteristics he displayed in abundance when I sketched in the outline of this debate and the personalities of the useful idiots comprising the opposition.

What you are admitting is that you talk to your cat, believing that his contempt and bored resignation was directed at the subject you explained to him without considering that he could just as likely have been demonstrating his contempt at you.
Anyway, cats remember that they were worshipped as gods in ancient Egypt and therefore can treat everyone with contempt.

Snapper, how can you call a Taliban a ‘combatant’?

Well, he had a gun and had been involved in combat. QED a combatant.

If we get maimed or killed it is considered to be less, much less important than the life of a seriously injured Taliban who anyway is doomed.

No, they is not less important – what is very important is that stupid idiots don’t go around shooting injured people dead just because they get their kicks in that fashion. What else can it be?
Maybe you can claim they provoked it by firing at you, but still the pillock with the helmet camera will prove that wrong. So with the film in the bag proving that the injured Taliban was no threat all we can conclude is that certain marines get their kicks by cowardly shooting unconscious fighters dead and then the dozy bunch confusingly claiming he was dead, no he was injured, etc.

But hey, only a bit of a defeat for the marines – two of them got away with murder.

Trouble is the ones that you would like to see leave, as I would, are UK citizens. Where are they going to be sent?

Not sure – maybe we should consult Johns cat…

trumper of course the Chief of Defence can not support clemency to Marine A, it’s not PC correct. His career would be over in an instant.

His career is over – potentially he is up for a life sentence. The chief of defence does not need to be PC about clemency, the fact is that premeditated murder is indefensible so clemency shouldn’t play a part.
But when has that stopped anybody?

You cannot accuse others of terrorism then commit similar acts yourself.

EXACTLY!

I don’t see how Marine A action was ”terrorism” or have I missed something?

You must have missed something – some oxygen when you were born, maybe?

Ask the ‘squaddie’ – your friend, he’ll have the answer !

And what does your cat say, John?

Until they have their time in court they are innocent.

In the same vein then that Taliban could have been presumed innocent, surely?

After all, he never made it to court…

I’m just sitting here with my popcorn watching you lot work yourselves up into a state of idiocy

Ruddy freeloader…

At the end of the day we could all have a hug and agree on everything.

Cold day in Hell and all that.

Don’t ask one squaddie, ask a thousand and see what the consensus is.

Or ask a thousand marines?
How about a thousand Taliban?

Meanwhile, ask a thousand members of the public how they feel about one of our guys being found guilty of murdering an unconscious man (Taliban or not) and on the same point – incidentally – how they feel about the Japanese carrying out similar acts in hospitals during the invasion of Singapore.
You see, once upon a time we would have hung an enemy who did something like that, so why should we hold one of our own up as a hero for doing what the Japanese did?

In the case of a soldier charged with, say, murder (on the battlefield) I would agree that it is only fair that the case is heard in a military court…

…but if the judgment of that court is ‘guilty of murder’ then the sentence should be equivalent to the sentence for murder in a civilian court.

But it was carried out in Afghanistan: what is the penalty for murder there…?

We have a democracy(for what its worth)

But you said: right or wrong. You want a dictatorship – but what if its not the extreme end of the political system you subscribe to?;o)

I go offline anticipating Snafu’s lengthy responses to today’s contributions!

Its a bloddy big number of threads spread over at least three pages! What can I do but post long…?

J

Charlie will be ecstatic over this one – he might even be able to read it on his phone!

The difference is he will serve his time in a military nick rather than a normal prison.

Maybe I misheard – I was in the car and the volume was low – but there was speculation on the radio (R5, I think) on Friday arvo that he would have to serve his time in a civilian prison, due to the lack of long term prison facilities in the military system.

How many lifers are there in the ‘glasshouse’ at Colchester anyway?

Sorry Charlie and Linc, not as long as last nights, but I did manage not to answer all the posts so – result!

Sooo…

…the USA / UK invaded Afghanistan so that they could install a ‘nice and western friendly man’ as President so he could ‘invite’ the USA / UK into Afghanistan…

…the Afghanistan where the USA / UK already had huge Forces that were desperately trying to get out?

You’ll have to run that one by me again…..it is late; I’m going to bed!

Me too, so tired!
Um, maybe it was the contract security company they’d invite in?
It worked in my mind earlier. I admit I fell asleep at some point though. Yes, the nice man from Afghanistan would invite the private security company in to assist his own forces in suppressing the bad guys, and they in turn would employ all those suddenly unwanted troops who – now needing the cash – would also be free of the shackles previously used to hold them back and could do what they felt was needed to get the job done, and with the backing of the boss fella.

Well, what would you do with all the excess soldiers once they are not needed in Afghanistan?;o)

Yes, but it is only going to get other terrorist groups ‘interested’ if these other terrorist groups also want to get British Forces out of Afghanistan, no?

No. Its association with others in armed struggles with similar objectives.
For example, how about the IRA sending bomb and urban warfare specialists to help FARC rebels in Columbia? Both have a history involving drugs but FARC will have no interest in a unified Ireland and the IRA can have little interest in overthrowing the Colombian government to replace it with a Marxist Leninist peasant dictatorship: what they share is the armed struggle, sod the location.