Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Alleged SAS War Crimes Report

Fair enough it's that what you believe, but you should be arguing that point with those claiming that it's all a pack of lies got up by the media.
I don't think it is a case of claiming that it is all a pack of lies got up by the media. More a fact that until any alleged suspects are charged, they are unsubstansiated allegations and they are innocent until proven guilty.

Don't the Australians have a saying for that "giving a man a fair go." That doesn't seem to apply to senior officers and former staff wallah's moralising on Arrse.
 
Just out of interest, did the "all out with no rules" action at My Lai 5 bring the US any closer to a victorious conclusion of the war?

Some folk get all sweatily excited about going "all out with no rules", but the historical record is pretty dismal.
It wasn't a case of an 'all out with no rules' in the Vietnam war was it though. Both Medina the Company Commander and Calley were court martialed with Calley being sentenced to life imprisonment
 
I don't think it is a case of claiming that it is all a pack of lies got up by the media. More a fact that until any alleged suspects are charged, they are unsubstansiated allegations and they are innocent until proven guilty.

Don't the Australians have a saying for that "giving a man a fair go." That doesn't seem to apply to senior officers and former staff wallah's moralising on Arrse.
I completely agree that they are according to the IGADF report and CDF unsubstantiated allegations (but "credible", which is a different measure) and that those concerned remain innocent of anything criminal unless and until proven guilty.

Most of the "moralising", as far as I am concerned, has been in response to those claiming that actually it doesn't matter anyway if the allegations are true. Argue with them if you don't agree.
 
I completely agree that they are according to the IGADF report and CDF unsubstantiated allegations (but "credible", which is a different measure) and that those concerned remain innocent of anything criminal unless and until proven guilty.

Most of the "moralising", as far as I am concerned, has been in response to those claiming that actually it doesn't matter anyway if the allegations are true. Argue with them if you don't agree.
If the cases are proven in court I will be up there in condemming what ever they are found guilty of, and the senior officers and politicians who put them in that position. Until then it is a case of giving them a 'fair go.
 
It wasn't a case of an 'all out with no rules' in the Vietnam war was it though. Both Medina the Company Commander and Calley were court martialled with Calley being sentenced to life imprisonment
Medina was acquitted; and you should read up on Calley's actual sentence as served... he used the Nuremburg Defence, and is quoted as saying:

"I was ordered to go in there and destroy the enemy. That was my job that day. That was the mission I was given. I did not sit down and think in terms of men, women, and children. They were all classified as the same, and that's the classification that we dealt with over there, just as the enemy. I felt then and I still do that I acted as I was directed, and I carried out the order that I was given and I do not feel wrong in doing so."


Sentenced on 29th March 1971; removed from prison and placed under house arrest at Fort Benning on 1st April 1971 (by Presidential order); had his sentence reduced to 20 years, then 10 years. Free on bail for four months during his appeal in 1974. Released 10th September 1976.

Wow, two days' hard time, and five years house arrest.

The real men that day were the helicopter crew; Warrant Officer Thompson, Specialists Andreotti and Colburn; and they suffered for daring to report the massacre.


When news of the massacre publicly broke, Thompson repeated his account to then-Colonel William Wilson and then-Lieutenant General William Peers during their official Pentagon investigations. In late-1969, Thompson was summoned to Washington, DC to appear before a special closed hearing of the House Armed Services Committee. There, he was sharply criticized by congressmen, in particular Chairman Mendel Rivers (D-S.C.), who were anxious to play down allegations of a massacre by American troops. Rivers publicly stated that he felt Thompson was the only soldier at My Lai who should be punished (for turning his weapons on fellow American troops) and unsuccessfully attempted to have him court-martialed.

Thompson was vilified by many Americans for his testimony against United States Army personnel. He recounted in a CBS 60 Minutes television program in 2004, "I'd received death threats over the phone...Dead animals on your porch, mutilated animals on your porch some mornings when you get up."

 
Who's a US teenager? I was in the British Army and spend many days in uniform & did 9 op tours. I did tours in Bosnia/Kosovo/Iraq/Afghanistan/Belize.....not to mention all the far flung shitholes I have been to working as a civvie, such as Sudan and some places in the middle east. I know all about wars dude - more than you will ever know.
You claim all that, and you still insist that there's no place for mercy or law? You want every war to turn into a widespread demonstration of the worst excesses of Bosnia, because "that's the way to win Afghanistan in a few weeks"?

Please explain how the Soviets failed to win Afghanistan because they were "too soft", or why Chechnya has still got an ISIS problem after medieval levels of brutality have been visited upon the population. Because you're talking bollocks. Quite apart from being a disgusting suggestion, it doesn't work.
 
I don't think it is a case of claiming that it is all a pack of lies got up by the media. More a fact that until any alleged suspects are charged, they are unsubstansiated allegations and they are innocent until proven guilty.

Don't the Australians have a saying for that "giving a man a fair go." That doesn't seem to apply to senior officers and former staff wallah's moralising on Arrse.
I don’t think there’s any doubt that the incidents took place. Brereton took multiple corroborating statements under oath. That is very different from proving the guilt of the alleged suspects.
 
Medina was acquitted; and you should read up on Calley's actual sentence as served... he used the Nuremburg Defence, and is quoted as saying:
I have already read the wiki article. The fact was that he was court martialed. the fact that they didn't have much choice once it was in the news and sentence he served was a disgrace has nothing to do with it. It just showed the schisms the Vietnam war caused in American society.
 
I don’t think there’s any doubt that the incidents took place. Brereton took multiple corroborating statements under oath. That is very different from proving the guilt of the alleged suspects.
How can they be under oath if the witnesses are ordered to give evidence? and as far as the law is concerned, until those witnesses are cross examined by Defence Barristers and a jury finds the Defendants guilty they are just statements given to a fact finding enquiry.
 
You claim all that, and you still insist that there's no place for mercy or law? You want every war to turn into a widespread demonstration of the worst excesses of Bosnia, because "that's the way to win Afghanistan in a few weeks"?

Please explain how the Soviets failed to win Afghanistan because they were "too soft", or why Chechnya has still got an ISIS problem after medieval levels of brutality have been visited upon the population. Because you're talking bollocks. Quite apart from being a disgusting suggestion, it doesn't work.
You're an idiot - try reading some history books that explain how many empires, countries conquered other countries. You sited 2 examples - but there are hundreds (probably thousands) of examples in history of countries dominating others through brute force & showing no mercy at all.

Let me recommend a good youtube channel called "Fall of Civilizations" so you can educate yourself a little. Do you ever wonder what happened to the Mesoamerican cultures when the Spanish turned up, or how the Sumerians a once mighty empire vanished. Or how the Romans basically wiped out the Druids in England etc, etc, etc......
 
No, they weren't the norm. Not until Axis forces demonstrated that it was top-down policy.

Nazi Germany had spent a decade of propaganda, bringing up its youth to believe that they were the Master Race, that their opponents were subhuman or evil, and that it was necessary to "clean" the world to remove the threat. They made a specialty of the murder of civilians in Eastern Europe, and was none too unhappy about translating that behaviour to Western Europe. They did this to PoWs and civilians from the very start of the war (Le Paradis, Wormhoudt), and before (see: Guernica), right to the very end (death marches of PWs). Unsurprisingly, the Eastern Front quickly became "no quarter asked, nor none given".

What's depressing is the number of alt-right types in the USA who now believe that the Germans did nothing wrong, they were forced into a war by the nasty aggressive British and French, and look! The Soviets were beastly! CoMMIe sOciaLIST AnTIfA BlM!!! Or is it the other way around? "I rather admire black uniforms and swastikas, and enjoy some casual racism, but I don't want to think I'm a bad person, so the Nazis must have been right, so I'd better make up some reasons that I can contradict all the evidence and history books"?


That's the informed opinion of a US teenager who has never served a day in uniform?
Don't forget Uncle Joe and our gallant Soviet allies were well ahead of the Nasty Nazis until 1941. Over one million Russians murdered in the Great Terror from 1936-38. The Katyn massacres in Poland and NKVD murders in the Baltic States in 1949/41. Plus all the people who died in the Gulags. Ask the Polish and other Eastern Europeans about those nice cuddly Soviets.

Or you could read 'Gulag' by Anne Applebaum.

0713993227.jpg
 
How can they be under oath if the witnesses are ordered to give evidence? and as far as the law is concerned, until those witnesses are cross examined by Defence Barristers and a jury finds the Defendants guilty they are just statements given to a fact finding enquiry.
Brereton interviewed over 350 soldiers under oath. It’s well documented in the report, in the coverage and in Campbell’s comments. The oath would have been different to that given by a witness in court. The soldiers were ordered to appear before Brereton; they were not forced to speak.

Of course, there is a huge evidential gap between Brereton and the standard of evidence required to convict in court, one that is unlikely to be closable. But that doesn’t discredit Brereton’s work.
 
Many witnesses statements were not elicited through coercion. Rather, some witnesses willingly participated.
We’re any of the witnesses coerced?

Witnesses may have been ordered to appear before Brereton, but that is not coercion. It’s that any different to a witness being subpoena’d to appear before a court?
 
I don’t think there’s any doubt that the incidents took place. Brereton took multiple corroborating statements under oath. That is very different from proving the guilt of the alleged suspects.

Of course, there is a huge evidential gap between Brereton and the standard of evidence required to convict in court, one that is unlikely to be closable. But that doesn’t discredit Brereton’s work.

I don't think anyone is trying to discredit Breretons work.

He has done what he was tasked with doing.

In the meantime, we have a number of alleged incidents that appear to be credible under the thresholds set for the Brereton inquiry.

These credible alleged incidents may ( or may not ) fail to meet the thresholds of an independent criminal investigation.

So what we have currently is

Alleged incidents
Alleged perpetrators

What we currently don't have is

Murderers
Anyone convicted of wrongdoing

Something that a few people should try getting their heads around.
 
We’re any of the witnesses coerced?

Witnesses may have been ordered to appear before Brereton, but that is not coercion. It’s that any different to a witness being subpoena’d to appear before a court?

Being ordered to attend and being ordered to answer, where it incriminates you (first person), that is coercion. I believe or, more accurately, I'm told that some were coerced.
 
Being ordered to attend and being ordered to answer, where it incriminates you (first person), that is coercion. I believe or, more accurately, I'm told that some were coerced.
One of the criticisms I’ve heard of Brereton is that there was no right to remain silent. That is itself perhaps implies a degree of coercion or at least inappropriate persuasion? I do, however, struggle to see how anyone can be ordered to answer a question.
 
I don't think anyone is trying to discredit Breretons work.

He has done what he was tasked with doing.

In the meantime, we have a number of alleged incidents that appear to be credible under the thresholds set for the Brereton inquiry.

These credible alleged incidents may ( or may not ) fail to meet the thresholds of an independent criminal investigation.

So what we have currently is

Alleged incidents
Alleged perpetrators

What we currently don't have is

Murderers
Anyone convicted of wrongdoing

Something that a few people should try getting their heads around.
I disagree. Many of the incidents are not alleged; they happened. They are well documented in patrol reports, photographs etc etc. The allegations relate to what actually occurred during the incidents, not that they happened.
 

Latest Threads

Top