![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
||
|
Quote:
We understand, but the law should still be upholded. There is no excuse for 24 civillian deaths by foot troops in 45 minutes. Monty pretty much explained what I feel, so I just posted to show that I am siding with the feel that these guys are getting light punishment. |
![]() |
||
![]() |
Quote:
There was no Fog here, they went inside and shot unarmed men including one in a wheelchair, women, and a child face to face, there was one unloaded weapon, unfired, not an unusual situation in Iraq. What could be more blatant, if you excuse this, then you can excuse anything. The message the court provides is that total war, Eastern front style is acceptable because of Fog. Except there is no Nuremberg in the offing for the perpetrators. Actually the Brits here are being even more generous to their American colleagues than it seems, since they could have be prosecuted under international law and had to control their anger under similar circumstances, whilst Americans are exempt from such inconveniences. If any good comes of this at least the US will be unlikely to get any support from other countries for any more wars of forcing disaster capitalism on any more countries, at least until they agree to conform to a civilised law. |
![]() |
||
![]() |
The nearest (recent official) situation I can find in the British army was the less extreme case (it's all relative) of the killing of Baha Mousa who died with 93 injuries in British army custody in Basra in 2003.
Quote:
I would be interested to know, does Sir Peter have enough experience of combat to have a view on this? |
![]() |
|
![]() |
I am sure the reprisals have been carried out and the whole thing is pretty much finished in Iraq now. You know the "evil" west as usual have installed a functioning democracy and respected the Iraqi Nations right to determine its own affairs.
In all seriousness the game changed in Iraq towards the end of 2006. The strategy changed US leadership got their head the around population centric nature of Hybrid warfare and they took a more holistic approach to the well being of Iraqis and the nations security. And as that took place the Iraqis saw the Al quida and external insurgents/ local extremists for what they were. People intentionally fanning the flames turning Iraqi against Iraqi and against the US and central government using them them as pawns for their own destruction. So Iraqis turned against them at first tribe by tribe in the rural regions and then this sentiment spread to urban areas. To the point where insurgents are now seen as the enemy destabilizing the nation. They are now the outsider. So this incident needs to be seen in the light of the time it was hard to identify the enemy operations were set up to find. Imagine feeling the whole nation was against you and people though not shooting at you were aiding the enemy. Hiding them,supplying them, might even be them. Strategy was yet to change to see that is was the population you must protect from the influence of the insurgent; the enemy may be hard to find but you can easily identify the local population. It is pointless to seek out and close with an enemy who can cut and run leaving you to create as much collateral damage as possible (as it furthers the insurgents cause by justifying there cause). I don't condone what happened I don't agree with how the case was handled. If they did infact kill 24 civilians intentionally. Then someone is responsible and should be held accountable. But anyway the situation then is different to what it is now. So don't talk of this incident as though it is current. Or has a bearing of what the armed forces in general are like. War effects people sh!t happens people make mistakes. Both mistakes in error and mistakes of judgement . I don't believe you cant comment on something if you weren't there but you cant claim to understand something if you weren't there. |
![]() |