Marchers show support for 5 Royal Marines charged with murder
207 replies, posted
[QUOTE=RobbL;38224742]I can see how deliberately killing an enemy soldier who is no longer an active threat is murder, but whether letting them die is also murder is something I can't make my mind up about[/QUOTE]
Understandable. "omission of an act" is one of the more confusing areas in law.
[QUOTE=ScoutKing;38224758]I would call it voluntary manslaughter[/QUOTE]
Could be that as well. I think the video will be key in determining whether or not it can be considered in the heat of passion.
Extracting a wounded POW is well within the capabilities of ISAF. With that in mind, why WOULD you leave someone to die, enemy or not?
We aren't there to kill people, we're there to try and stabilise the country.
what the fuck, soldiers are NOT obligated to provide medical assistance to wounded combatants.
Medics, yes. Soldiers, no.
How they are getting tried for murder is beyond me.
Look at that smug police bastard on the right.
He looks like he's had a nice day.
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;38224657]If they're guilty of murder, then they get tried for murder
the nationality or the victim, or where it happened is irrelevant
soldiers should be the finest a country can provide, if they're willing to sit back and watch a man die for personal amusement, then they can face justice[/QUOTE]
If you're tying to class killing someone in warfare as murder, then we have a [b]massive[/b] backlog of cases to get through.
[QUOTE=David29;38224911]If you're tying to class killing someone in warfare as murder, then we have a [b]massive[/b] backlog of cases to get through.[/QUOTE]
David29 we all know you loooove to get on your UKIP horse about these kinda things, but don't you think it's a [B]little[/B] suspicious that this is the first case like this in 11 years of being in Afghanistan. When there have been killings before.
Especially over a case that has been shrouded in secrecy.
It's pretty likely that these guys have been caught with something fucking horrific on their camcorders, so tell me again, why are you trying to justify all this?
[QUOTE=NoDachi;38224586]If these 5 morons could find time to make a video of a man dying for their own personal pleasure rather than doing something about it, then they're pretty much in the fucking wrong.[/QUOTE]
I sort of doubt this since it's the Daily Mail, but-
[QUOTE]video emerges showing patrol discussing if injured Taliban insurgent should be given aid
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Kinversulath;38224801]
Could be that as well. I think the video will be key in determining whether or not it can be considered in the heat of passion.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]A finding that a person who killed another acted in the heat of passion will reduce murder to Manslaughter under certain circumstances. The essential prerequisites for such a reduction are that the accused must be provoked to a point of great anger or rage, such that the person loses his or her normal capacity for self-control; the circumstances must be such that a reasonable person, faced with the same degree of provocation, would react in a similar manner; and finally, there must not have been an opportunity for the accused to have "cooled off" or regained self-control during the period between the provocation and the killing.[/QUOTE]
Could be, but if the incident was more like what NoDachi explained I really don't know
I think murder's a little high of a charge, but you can't argue with the Geneva Convention.
[QUOTE=RobbL;38224985]I know it's the Daily Mail, but-[/QUOTE]
Yeah I read that. But only the Daily Mail is pushing that rather 'innocent' spin over a video they don't even have access too yet, nor has the events been open to the public.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;38224958]David29 we all know you loooove to get on your UKIP horse about these kinda things[/QUOTE]
Oh that's cheap, NoDachi. I would have expected something more above-the-belt from you than some cheap swipe regarding whom I do or do not support in politics - which has fuck all to do with this particular topic.
Have a bit more class, will you?
[QUOTE=NoDachi;38224958]but don't you think it's a [B]little[/B] suspicious that this is the first case like this in 11 years of being in Afghanistan.
Especially over a case that has been shrouded in secrecy.
It's pretty likely that these guys have been caught with something fucking horrific on their camcorders, so tell me again, why are you trying to justify all this?[/QUOTE]
Er, sorry, excuse me? When did I try to justify it? I merely pointed out that killing someone in a combat in a combat situation is not murder. Personally, if it was me, I [i]would[/i] have acted and tried to help the injured combatant.
And, personally, I would rather not base my decisions on the matter on your 'suspicions'...
UKIP sound like a bunch of wankers to me.
[QUOTE=David29;38225147]Oh that's cheap, NoDachi. I would have expected something more above-the-belt from you than some cheap swipe regarding whom I do or do not support in politics - which has fuck all to do with this particular topic.
Have a bit more class, will you?[/QUOTE]
I'm sorry that was a cheap shot.
I'm just tired of scrolling down that massive title of yours already knowing what crap is going to be found at the bottom.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;38225172]I'm sorry that was a cheap shot.
I'm just tired of scrolling down that massive title of yours already knowing what crap is going to be found at the bottom.[/QUOTE]
Well considering the text of my post is located at the top...
But either way, I will forgive you.
Soldiers follow orders and the Geneva Convention is an order!!!
[QUOTE=David29;38225208]Well considering the text of my post is located at the top...
But either way, I will forgive you.[/QUOTE]
I meant the general argument trend. How as I said you'd put the "UKIP spin" as I so delicately put it.
ahahahahah "lads" 1 of 10 results, you massive fucking winner. God I don't see why these people see fit to protest against an ongoing case when they don't know any of the fucking details
Hate to break it to you guys, but our enemies are not classified as EPW's under the conventions. You guys love to throw that thing around, but have little to no idea of what is actually contained in it. I am given extremely basic medical training to help save my buddy's life in case of emergency, called CLS (Combat Life Saving). I am under no obligation to medically aid the enemy, as I am not medical personnel. It is not within my skills to try and stabilize the insurgent after we shoot them. If there is not a medic around, that is tough. Our own soldiers take priority in any situation, then civilians, then enemy personnel. Now, we can't really judge what happened here until more details are readily available. I am speaking from a US Soldier's perspective within ISAF, so I am not sure if British protocols are different. Correct me if I get any British stuff wrong, it is not exactly within the realms of my knowledge, other than nations in ISAF generally operate similarly, with some differences in ROE and combat doctrine.
[QUOTE=BuffaloBill;38224485]I'm fairly certain it's not a regular grunt's duty or obligation to provide medical aid to anybody except his own buddies. Not aiding an enemy, especially one who was shooting at you 2 minutes earlier, seems only logical to me.[/QUOTE]
It is though, when we're taught to triage we have to include the enemy too, in theory if the enemy is in a worse state than an ally you're meant to treat them first then your ally. Whether or not this is carried out or not I don't know as I'm not infantry.
Yeah, it's different to the American Army SKEEA.
What are the rules on filming people die of their injuries for personal use?
The taliban dont even follow the Geneva convention anyways
[QUOTE=Tobba;38225847]The taliban dont even follow the Geneva convention anyways[/QUOTE]
Your point being?
[QUOTE=PyroCF;38225860]Your point being?[/QUOTE]
Its kinda hypocritical to expect aid from the enemy when you try to gun down enemy medevacs
[QUOTE=NoDachi;38225780]What are the rules on filming people die of their injuries for personal use?[/QUOTE]
I want to see where you get all of your glorious insight into what exactly happened, seeing as we clearly know everything there is to know about the circumstances of the situation and the actions of those involved. Oh wait. Also, you can totally film whatever you are doing, just as long as it does not compromise OPSEC.
[QUOTE=Tobba;38225847]The taliban dont even follow the Geneva convention anyways[/QUOTE]
meaning that if we also don't follow them, 2x the atrocities happen...
[QUOTE=Tobba;38225879]Its kinda hypocritical to expect aid from the enemy when you try to gun down enemy medevacs[/QUOTE]
That's why we have to maintain professionalism. Even in situations like this. It's all about hearts and minds in this war, it's the only way we can fight an ideal.
[QUOTE=SKEEA;38225890]I want to see where you get all of your glorious insight into what exactly happened, seeing as we clearly know everything there is to know about the circumstances of the situation and the actions of those involved. Oh wait. Also, you can totally film whatever you are doing, just as long as it does not compromise OPSEC.[/QUOTE]
I'm posing a question you muppet.
[QUOTE=Tobba;38225879]Its kinda hypocritical to expect aid from the enemy when you try to gun down enemy medevacs[/QUOTE]
That's why we have Kiowas.
[editline]28th October 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=NoDachi;38225928]I'm posing a question you muppet.[/QUOTE]
Did I not answer it? Look at the last part of my post.
[QUOTE=SKEEA;38225932]Did I not answer it? Look at the last part of my post.[/QUOTE]
Then what was the first part all about?
[QUOTE=Tobba;38225847]The taliban dont even follow the Geneva convention anyways[/QUOTE]
That's why it's so important. It separates us from them.
[sp]-Batman[/sp]
[QUOTE=NoDachi;38224698]So they basically made a home-video of them murdering what was probably a PoW?
And people defend this?[/QUOTE]
Of course, you get the right wing nutters and the tabloids screaming ''SUPPORT OUR BOYS'' and whatnot.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.