Marine "A" Murderer or casualty of War

[TCIB]

Who do you think you are sir?
TCIB is a massive deal around here, and you should address him in a more appropriate manner, you ****.

Reporting for duty Sir, you cu*t!

No you're not

This thread has all us cunts in it, what a cunty thread.

 

[bernabias home shirt]

Try to imagine how tense the situation is when you are constantly on alert, you see one of the enemy that has been shooting at you lying injured, what would you do? Yeah me I'd probably shoot him dead too just to make sure I was safe. So no I don't think he should have been tried for murder. He was a soldier at war in active combat

Then you too would be a murderer just as the Marine is...

 

[BlueBearBoots]

Try to imagine how tense the situation is when you are constantly on alert, you see one of the enemy that has been shooting at you lying injured, what would you do? Yeah me I'd probably shoot him dead too just to make sure I was safe. So no I don't think he should have been tried for murder. He was a soldier at war in active combat

Then you too would be a murderer just as the Marine is...

He was the enemy - thought when you were at war the idea was to win?

 

[Timmmmahhhh]

Are you watching this NF ??? last time we had this topic you called all Soldiers Murderer's IIRC and subsequently got banned, nice to see a balanced account of this for a change.

I'm pretty sure I have never called all soldiers murderers, as that is just nonsense.
Not that I don't post nonsense on occasion, but this would be unchartered territory even for me.
The subsequent banning almost certainly happened, but then that isn't an unusual denouement for me.
As others have said, he is clearly both - a military court has convicted him of murder, therefore he is a murderer, but then there is a valid argument that a combination of army training and his own experiences in the theatre of war drove him to act as he did.
Perhaps surprisingly to you, I have a degree of sympathy for him - war is an odd environment in which conventional morality takes a back seat to survival, and you can take the life of another and end up getting a medal, whereas in civvy street you would be looking at a mandatory life stretch.
My view is that he needs to be punished for his crime - that shows those we are in combat against that we do not tolerate cold blooded murder, and puts us on a higher moral footing, and sets a precedent for others.
That said, I hope he is receiving all the counselling and psychological help he needs to sort his head out so that when he is released he can begin to rebuild his life.
There are no winners in this sad situation other than the British army, who deserve credit for bringing him to trial, where a whitewash or cover-up would have been easier and more politically expedient.

You been drinking?

 

[without a dream]

Clearly a murderer. Surely he would have tried for grounds of diminished responsibility in his trial if he was mentally ill? He knowingly contravened the Geneva convention, I don't see where the doubt comes in tbh.

 

[Challenger1978]

The Afghan in question had been seriously injured in an attack by an Apache Helicopter when Marine A shot him dead. I have no idea why this even came to court they were in combat, but of course it against the Geneva Convention and he was heard to say this to his comrades so maybe that's why. It appears that the military court had sympathies because they reduced the minimum sentence from 15 years to 10.

Try to imagine how tense the situation is when you are constantly on alert, you see one of the enemy that has been shooting at you lying injured, what would you do? Yeah me I'd probably shoot him dead too just to make sure I was safe. So no I don't think he should have been tried for murder. He was a soldier at war in active combat

I would to.

The Taliban have a reputation for committing suicide attacks. I wouldn't put it past them to booby trap their own injured just so they could take out some of our lads.

 

[nijinsky's fetlocks]

The Afghan in question had been seriously injured in an attack by an Apache Helicopter when Marine A shot him dead. I have no idea why this even came to court they were in combat, but of course it against the Geneva Convention and he was heard to say this to his comrades so maybe that's why. It appears that the military court had sympathies because they reduced the minimum sentence from 15 years to 10.

Try to imagine how tense the situation is when you are constantly on alert, you see one of the enemy that has been shooting at you lying injured, what would you do? Yeah me I'd probably shoot him dead too just to make sure I was safe. So no I don't think he should have been tried for murder. He was a soldier at war in active combat

I would to.

The Taliban have a reputation for committing suicide attacks. I wouldn't put it past them to booby trap their own injured just so they could take out some of our lads.

He had been bodysearched, so clearly wasn't booby-trapped.
He was unarmed.
He was seriously injured.
Therefore he presented no threat to the armed squaddies who held him captive.
If you had shot him, then you would have been a murderer, and a lousy soldier as well, because you aren't trained to act in that way.

 

[SWP's back]

Try to imagine how tense the situation is when you are constantly on alert, you see one of the enemy that has been shooting at you lying injured, what would you do? Yeah me I'd probably shoot him dead too just to make sure I was safe. So no I don't think he should have been tried for murder. He was a soldier at war in active combat

Then you too would be a murderer just as the Marine is...

He was the enemy - thought when you were at war the idea was to win?

Not a fan of the Geneva Convention?

 

[BlueBearBoots]

Then you too would be a murderer just as the Marine is...

He was the enemy - thought when you were at war the idea was to win?

Not a fan of the Geneva Convention?

My whole post is further up the thread above quoted bit is just an extract. However I know the Marine was well aware that he was in contravention of the GC, he actually said so and told his comrades to keep it quiet so he knew very well what he was doing was wrong - I was more thinking in that situation you wouldn't know where the next bullet was coming from, he had been shot at (he'd been there for 5 months already) the pressure must be tremendous and although our soldiers are very brave it must be terrifying being under threat of death all the time!

Fetters says above that he had been body searched and was unarmed, I didn't know that (should have read all the hundreds of pages about the case) however I still say a soldier on the field shouldn't be tried for murder - there should be a different charge. As I said earlier there are mitigating circumstances here and the military court thought this too when they reduced the minimum sentence from 15 to 10.

Feel sorry for the guy - there is not way I could the job of a soldier and if I was forced to I would be shooting everyone in sight before they shot me!

 

[nijinsky's fetlocks]

There are no fucking mitigating circumstances here - he shot dead an unarmed and injured prisoner of war in cold blood, and then boasted about it.
Anyone who thinks this is acceptable conduct from a serving British soldier is an utter fucking idiot.