Military hearing may test war laws

Discussion in 'Multinational HQ' started by Trip_Wire, Aug 26, 2007.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Trip_Wire

    Trip_Wire RIP

    Link to article.:

    http://www.fayobserver.com:80/article?id=270702

    Military hearing on SF case may force changes in ROEs

    At this time, I agree with the former SF Commander (In Bold) below. What do they expect when they supply a list of "kill-or-capture" people on it, especially when your dealing with suicide bombers and wannabe martyrs.

    There is already a lot of discussion within the SF community on this incident. Of couse, most agree with the SF Commander I quoted.


    “It stymies everything — creativity, calculated risk-taking, all of the latitude and creativity that you must use in Afghanistan,” said a former Special Forces commander who served in Iraq and Afghanistan. “Without that, we’re doomed to do the same old stuff. It is a recipe for defeat.”

    He said the Article 32 is a classic example of “leadership by penmanship.” The top commanders of Special Forces, he said, may pay lip service to creative thinking but they’ve made their careers by being cautious.

    “They color inside the lines,” he said. “They grew up in a box factory.”
    Maj. Counts, the Special Forces spokesman, said the Article 32 investigation is to determine the facts of the case and should not have any adverse effect on future operations.

    “Honest people can have differing observations from their perspective of view,” Counts said. “The purpose of the Article 32 is to understand all points of view.”
     
  2. How dare a soldier shoot and kill the enemy, thats against the enemies human rights. :roll:
     
  3. scaryspice

    scaryspice LE Moderator

    Trip - please see the new announcement at the top of this forum about posting articles like this in future. A summary is fine or the first few paragraphs to get some discussion going, but not the whole thing.
     
  4. Trip_Wire

    Trip_Wire RIP

    i haven't seen any such notice; however, I'm well aware of the need you mention.

    It would seem tha user Crabtastic, reminds me VERY often about cutting and pasting, etc. :)

    I can only offer as my reason for posting the whole article, the fact that I wanted to express my own opinion of the subject, using a quote from a quote in the article.

    I found that the SF Commander's, expression in the article, which I put into bold print, was also the way, I felt about the incident.

    So, without posting the article, with theses quotes and/or comments as I did, it wouldn't have been able to express how I felt about the incident, as well as being able to use his quote. :wink:
     
  5. scaryspice

    scaryspice LE Moderator

    You hadn't seen the notice because it's NEW Trip... Have a look now :)

    [quote="Trip_Wire]
    I can only offer as my reason for posting the whole article, the fact that I wanted to express my own opinion of the subject, using a quote from a quote in the article.

    I found that the SF Commander's, expression in the article, which I put into bold print, was also the way, I felt about the incident.

    So, without posting the article, with theses quotes and/or comments as I did, it wouldn't have been able to express how I felt about the incident, as well as being able to use his quote. :wink:[/quote]

    So next time just post the link to the article, a summary of what it says and the quote you agree with? We will be cutting whole articles if posted - sorry but that's the decision here.
     
  6. For someone with such a "long and distinguished" career in "SF and LE", Trip, you're casting an incredibly uncritical eye over this report. But then thinking has never really been your strong suit, has it?

    Neither you or I, nor any other member of the general public are aware of the evidence in this case. All we have is this article which draws much of its information as to what happened from a statement made by the lawyer of an individual who is being investigated for murder.

    Think back to your time as cop and your usual reaction then when a lawyer for the defence (defense) went running to the press to help set the agenda in the public eye in advance of any trial.
     
  7. CID did clear these men in a previous investigation of the incident. This smacks of someone at SOC Afghanistan playing the age old game of CYA.
     
  8. Trip_Wire

    Trip_Wire RIP

    crabtastic:

    Actually, I did study this article VERY carefully. Apprently you didn't. As Tomahawk 6, has pointed out the soldier has been investigated twice and found NOT GUILTY by the US Army's Criminal Investigation Division, Conmmand.

    The article and the details therein, are a matter of public record, since they have been released to the press.

    No charges have been filed against the individual, nor am I involved in the investigation, nor do I have any more details, then those relesed to the press by US Army sources. So, I see no problem what-so-ever with discussing the facts that have been made a public record by the US Army, etc.

    The is the Article 32 investigation nothing more then a military version of the a Grand Jury type of look at the case, to see if charges should be filed. I sort of doubt, that they will file a murder charge, given the data known about the case now. If they are charged, I doubt, that they will ever be convicted of murder, etc.

    Quote:

    Before any charge is sent to a general court-martial, an Article 32 investigation must be conducted. The Article 32 investigation is closely akin to the civilian grand jury investigation. At the close of the hearing, the Article 32 officer, makes a recommendation concerning the disposition of the charges.

    http://www.defenselink.mil/vwac/military.html

    So, Crabby, it's like I told you in another post, stick to the things that you know someting about like CRAB stuff or those ultra liberal things that you love to blab on about!
     
  9. Trip_Wire

    Trip_Wire RIP

    So next time just post the link to the article, a summary of what it says and the quote you agree with? We will be cutting whole articles if posted - sorry but that's the decision here.[/quote]

    Ok! I did see the notice! I'll try to keep it in mine, on those articles that have a link! I also modified the posted article.

    There are some articles that I get from other SF and other Veterans, such as the Barb submarine article, that I feel maybe of interest to WWII buffs, etc, that have no link to post.

    So, I guess if I post such an article, you'll have to be the dreaded Censor and cut the article out, based on your idea that it's to long or boring, or whatever, etc.?

    This seems like a tough task for some of the Mods here, who seem to share some of the same biases of others here. But of course, no Mod here, would ever let their personal bias decide such an issues now would they? :wink:
     
  10. Trip_Wire

    Trip_Wire RIP

    Yes, I agree! I think the one SF Commander I quoted said that as well. :wink:
     
  11. “It stymies everything — creativity, calculated risk-taking, all of the latitude and creativity that you must use in Afghanistan,” said a former Special Forces commander who served in Iraq and Afghanistan. “Without that, we’re doomed to do the same old stuff. It is a recipe for defeat.”

    For more than a thousand years, there have been rules of war to make sure things don't get out of hand. This is because war is just a part of a broader political context. SF push the envelope than regular troops, to be sure, but they still have rules which much be followed. To that end, soldiers will always complain about having one hand tied behind their backs, but they're constrained for good reason- the political masters must be sure that the people they send out there are not going to make things worse. After all, SF are supposed to be among the smartest troops in the army but if you, Trip, are an example of the smartest, I dread to think what the dumbest are like. The problem is, as the good man above states, it frustrates people and operations because one act with the elan and derring-do so beloved of advocates of the indirect approach, which may provide the critical edge in securing victory. However, if history has taught us anything, overenthusiasm for the indirect approach can result in an alarmingly high incidence of c0ck-ups also. THAT'S what the politicians, the perfumed princes at the Pentagon and the headshed of SOCOM are most worried about.

    The interesting question for me, supposing that the soldiers are political pawns, is this- if they are scapegoated and this helps to contribute to stability in the area, would it be worth it? From an ethical standpoint, would it be worth putting a couple of American soliders in the slammer if it both helps to achieve what is America's stated policy interest and saves the lives of more US and allied forces? It sure as Hell wouldn't be the first time this happened. Just look at the story of Breaker Morant for that. (Remarkably similar story- unconventional troops in breach of established RoE, but- as far as they were concerned- were acting with the authority of superiors, were executed to help keep the war contained within certain parameters.) Where does the obligation the Govt have to its fighting men and women begin and end?
     
  12. scaryspice

    scaryspice LE Moderator

    I can't speak for the others Trip, but no I wouldn't. My personal opinion has no bearing on how I moderate the forums I am responsible for. If you - or anyone else for that matter - feel your posts are being dealt with unfairly please feel free to say so in here or to PM me or to complain to Admin.

    If you are reposting articles from elsewhere that have no link, I assume this means they are not from the internet? If this is the case and you can assure me that the author(s) have no copyright issue with what you are posting AND I can see it is relevant to this forum I would be quite prepared to let it stand. Simply drop me a PM if you post such an article? This is not about censorship, it's about not copying and pasting huge chunks of the internet onto arrse.
     
  13. I think Scaryspice is doing a great job here. :D