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

Nige

LE
I think this is the paragraph that @par avion was referring to



IMHO - Over the near 10 year period in question, anyone who believes that, will also believe that I have a very nice bridge to sell in Sydney.
The inquiry found no evidence of.... then later says

1606553946527.png


The last dot point does suggest 633 and JOC are off the hook, but I'd 'watch this space' ....
 
As you have accused me of defending the Nazis I formally invoke Godwin's which means that you have lost the argument and we can move on.

Leaving aside the fact that it was @mrdude who brought the subject up, if you can't mention them in a discussion about the deliberate murder of unarmed prisoners of war (at best) or the deliberate murder of innocent civilians (at worst), when is it appropriate?

I'm merely questioning your motives, on the basis of the posts you're making. There is some pretty unambiguous helmet camera footage; there has been a credible investigation by the ADF; and yet you appear to be making excuses for criminal behaviour. If they didn't want to be labelled war criminals, they shouldn't have shot unarmed civilians, without any excuse that they didn't know exactly what they were doing.
 
From Mr. Godwin himself, "Although deliberately framed as if it were a law of nature or of mathematics," "its purpose has always been rhetorical and pedagogical: I wanted folks who glibly compared someone else to Hitler to think a bit harder about the Holocaust."

Everyone seems to simply invoke Godwin in every scenario, but are ignorant of the fact that it doesn't, and wasn't meant to, apply to discussions that do actually have some genuine links or potential comparisons, like potential war crimes
 
I'm merely questioning your motives, on the basis of the posts you're making. There is some pretty unambiguous helmet camera footage; there has been a credible investigation by the ADF; and yet you appear to be making excuses for criminal behaviour. If they didn't want to be labelled war criminals, they shouldn't have shot unarmed civilians, without any excuse that they didn't know exactly what they were doing.

Thankfully some people still believe in innocent until proven guilty.

Credible Investigation by the ADF ? Do you mean an inquiry rather than investigation ?

This one

Witnesses who have given evidence to the Inquiry under compulsion may not be willing to give it to prosecutorial authorities. Witnesses on whose evidence the Inquiry has relied have, while tested by the Inquiry, not been cross-examined by an opposing party. For all these reasons, as is common experience with commissions of inquiry, it does not follow from a finding in this Report that there is credible information of a war crime, that there will be a prosecution, let alone a conviction.

And

. This is not a finding of guilt, nor a finding (to any standard) that the crime has in fact been committed. A finding that there is ‘credible information’ of a matter – for example, that a particular person has committed a particular war crime – is not a finding, on balance of probability let alone to a higher standard, that the person has committed that crime. Generally, it is analogous to a finding that there are reasonable grounds for a supposition.

No one has been found guilty of anything ( That may well change at some point in the future )
 

Caecilius

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
I'm merely questioning your motives, on the basis of the posts you're making. There is some pretty unambiguous helmet camera footage; there has been a credible investigation by the ADF; and yet you appear to be making excuses for criminal behaviour. If they didn't want to be labelled war criminals, they shouldn't have shot unarmed civilians, without any excuse that they didn't know exactly what they were doing.

I think you're on a hiding to nothing. There are some people on here who are clearly desperate to use any technicality they can find to cover for war crimes. It's hard to tell if it's an SF fan-boy thing, a belief that 'anything goes' in a war zone, or a racially motivated disregard for the lives of non-westerners.

Either way, I think this is a debate that we all need to accept isn't going to conclude and we just have to hope that those excusing war crimes never actually served.
 
I think you're on a hiding to nothing. There are some people on here who are clearly desperate to use any technicality they can find to cover for war crimes. It's hard to tell if it's an SF fan-boy thing, a belief that 'anything goes' in a war zone, or a racially motivated disregard for the lives of non-westerners.

Does it confuse you when some people say '' Innocent until proven guilty '' ?

In relation to the thread, does it confuse you that currently, no-one has been charged with a crime, never mind a war crime ?

You are so confused that you even manage to shoehorn racism in.

and we just have to hope that those excusing war crimes never actually served.

Think you need to highlight where anyone has been excusing war crimes.

Just to confuse you even further - Awaiting the outcome of Due Process is not excusing anything.
 

Caecilius

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
In relation to the thread, does it confuse you that currently, no-one has been charged with a crime, never mind a war crime ?

No. Because I understand that there's a difference between Brereton establishing that these things happened, and people being found individually guilty of them. You keep desperately making the point that nobody has been convicted (in bold) as if that's all that matters. I think everyone on the thread acknowledges that there have been no convictions and there may never be. That doesn't change the fact that SASR have commited a bunch of war crimes in Afghanistan.


Think you need to highlight where anyone has been excusing war crimes

Happy to:

Where is the footage of then 15 - 20 minutes prior to the 2:09 minutes shown

Immediately prior to the 2:09 minutes of footage he could have been spraying like a madman - Hence the troops being directed by Blackhawks

The mask rather slipped there I'm afraid.

Edited to add: if you want some more examples of someone excusing war crimes, the stuff from mrdude below is a great place to start.
 
Last edited:
Leaving aside the fact that it was @mrdude who brought the subject up, if you can't mention them in a discussion about the deliberate murder of unarmed prisoners of war (at best) or the deliberate murder of innocent civilians (at worst), when is it appropriate?
You brought the subject of Nazi's up - not me.

Also nobody has been convicted of anything - and in this country we are innocent until we have been proven guilty in a court of law - same thing goes with Australia. So by that standard - nobody is guilty of murder.

How come you are not going about whinging like fook about the Taliban that murdered thousands of civilians, and murdered soldiers with IED's, etc? When we see ALL the Taliban taken to task and sent to prison, maybe we will have some sympathy - but we don't and that's why 99.9% of Brits/Ausies don't give a fook about the life of some Taliban scum. (Personally I would have liked to see 100% of them executed publicly).

People like you go on and on and on and on about rules - make sure you use the same feverence for making sure the other side are treated in the same manner. How many journo's do you know that are trying to get Taliban war criminals taken to task?
 
Personally I thought this is a pretty good summary of the several angles to this:
Liberal senator Jim Molan, a former major general who served in Iraq, said in an email to Liberal Party members there was "much to be done" in the wake of the Brereton report's findings.

"Let's look after the wellbeing of all of those involved and their families, and I can vouch for the impact on self and family of being accused of such crimes," he said.

"Let's guard the reputation of the military in this country because they deserve our support and we need our military to be strong and effective in these very uncertain times. Let's also support the process to now take its course and have confidence in our legal system.

"The presumption of innocence is critical as is the support of those involved."
Source:
 
You brought the subject of Nazi's up - not me.
Errrr.... no. Have a reminder about your assertion that Axis forces (aka Nazis) behaved according to the norm.

Also nobody has been convicted of anything - and in this country we are innocent until we have been proven guilty in a court of law - same thing goes with Australia. So by that standard - nobody is guilty of murder.

Crap logic. Did you watch that helmet camera footage? Someone was murdered, ergo an Australian soldier is guilty of murder. Please, do explain how it wasn't a murder of an unarmed person. The lack of a conviction, doesn't suddenly mean that a crime wasn't committed - it just means they haven't proved to a sufficient standard that it was committed by the accused.

How come you are not going about whinging like fook about the Taliban that murdered thousands of civilians, and murdered soldiers with IED's, etc? When we see ALL the Taliban taken to task and sent to prison, maybe we will have some sympathy - but we don't and that's why 99.9% of Brits/Ausies don't give a fook about the life of some Taliban scum. (Personally I would have liked to see 100% of them executed publicly).
Because we already know that the Taliban are murdering scum. It's just that we've been assuring ourselves that we're "the good guys". We're the ones trying to build a stable-enough government that doesn't fail into the hands of the minority of mass-murderers, bigots, and religious fanatics who believe that they just need to kill until they get what they want. It's how we justify our armies operating in another country.

You appear to believe that this is a naive standard we hold ourselves to, and in an earlier post insisted that our foreign policy goals should be attained with the merciless use of fire and sword.
 
@Gravelbelly

AXIS forces consisted of Germans, Italians, Japs and a few others.....are you saying all Germans were Nazi's and the Japs were Nazi's - I said AXIS forces. YOU in your blinkered view on the world took that on your own to mean Nazi.......that's why you would be a shit lawyer, as you just don't stick to the facts, and try to miss-quote people. Hence once again proving to the world that you are indeed an idiot.

You said: Because we already know that the Taliban are murdering scum. It's just that we've been assuring ourselves that we're "the good guys".

I don't think anybody should care about being seen as a 'good guy', If I had my way I would have rounded up the entire lot of them and shot them all. You are too far left for my liking, you would be next in line after the Taliban with that attitude of yours.

An eye for an eye - that's what it says in the bible, and I wouldn't have any care or mercy on slotting some twat that had killed my comrades a few days earlier with an IED or something. If you live by the sword you should expect to die by the sword. These Taliban scum deserved everything they got in my opinion........it's just a pity we didn't kill even more of them.
 
Last edited:
@Gravelbelly

An eye for an eye - that's what it says in the bible, and I wouldn't have any care or mercy on slotting some twat that had killed my comrades a few days earlier with an IED or something.
Did you do much of that while you were working in the LAD? You were REME, I take it, now that you've reassured us that you're not a US teenager?
 

widow11

On ROPS
On ROPs
@Gravelbelly

AXIS forces consisted of Germans, Italians, Japs and a few others.....are you saying all Germans were Nazi's and the Japs were Nazi's - I said AXIS forces. YOU in your blinkered view on the world took that on your own to mean Nazi.......that's why you would be a shit lawyer, as you just don't stick to the facts, and try to miss-quote people. Hence once again proving to the world that you are indeed an idiot.

You said: Because we already know that the Taliban are murdering scum. It's just that we've been assuring ourselves that we're "the good guys".

I don't think anybody should care about being seen as a 'good guy', If I had my way I would have rounded up the entire lot of them and shot them all. You are too far left for my liking, you would be next in line after the Taliban with that attitude of yours.

An eye for an eye - that's what it says in the bible, and I wouldn't have any care or mercy on slotting some twat that had killed my comrades a few days earlier with an IED or something. If you live by the sword you should expect to die by the sword. These Taliban scum deserved everything they got in my opinion........it's just a pity we didn't kill even more of them.
It’s a good thing that you have never served even a single day in your life then.
 
Errrr.... no. Have a reminder about your assertion that Axis forces (aka Nazis) behaved according to the norm.



Crap logic. Did you watch that helmet camera footage? Someone was murdered, ergo an Australian soldier is guilty of murder. Please, do explain how it wasn't a murder of an unarmed person. The lack of a conviction, doesn't suddenly mean that a crime wasn't committed - it just means they haven't proved to a sufficient standard that it was committed by the accused.


Because we already know that the Taliban are murdering scum. It's just that we've been assuring ourselves that we're "the good guys". We're the ones trying to build a stable-enough government that doesn't fail into the hands of the minority of mass-murderers, bigots, and religious fanatics who believe that they just need to kill until they get what they want. It's how we justify our armies operating in another country.

You appear to believe that this is a naive standard we hold ourselves to, and in an earlier post insisted that our foreign policy goals should be attained with the merciless use of fire and sword.
FFS you have lost the argument. Stop wibbling on about Nazis and derailing the thread. This is about Afghanistan in the 21st Century concerning 39 allegations of unlawful killings by 19 Australian SF personnel. It has nothing to do with the Nazis.
 
Did you do much of that while you were working in the LAD? You were REME, I take it, now that you've reassured us that you're not a US teenager?
Typical lefty - doesn't like the way the conversation is going so tries to change the subject, I expected nothing more from you though, so I am not surprised.
 
Personally I thought this is a pretty good summary of the several angles to this:

Source:
The comments in the article were quite interesting, I liked this one.

So 3000 ADF personel 99% of them entirely innocent and blameless are to lose their citation. Yep innocent until proven guilty is really at work here.

General Campbell has been awarded a Distinguished Service Cross for “Distinguished command and leadership in action as Commander of the joint task force 633 on operation Slipper from January 2011 to December 2011.”

The HQ was in Qatar remote from Afghanistan. Not for them the dust and heat.
Breretonin the report says he was too remote from the field to have a “sufficient degree of command and control.” so therefor could not be held responsible.

Question:
If he did not have a “sufficient degree of command and control.” why was he awarded the DSC?
 

Latest Threads

Top