http://tinyurl.com/2aw8p5 Todays Daily Telegraph Front-line fighting is alien to UK law givers Last Updated: 6:44am BST 14/06/2007 This article has been writtten by a serving Royal Military Police officer, who has been in operational combat theatre in Iraq, but who cannot be publicly identified.The news from the House of Lords gives us a fascinating insight into the total lack of understanding that politicians have of the military and an operational environment that exists in the world today.In bygone years, both Houses were filled with men and women who had served their country in a military capacity and therefore had a first-hand understanding of what life was like on the ground for the average soldier.There was an understanding of the pressures and the danger. That understanding, knowledge and indeed respect has now gone and the evidence can be found in the ignorance and stupidity behind supporting the application of the Human Rights Act in a military environment.[/quote]Well, Im sorry Military Police Officer. You fight the war you have and not the war you would choose. The men who filled the House in bygone years did not do so in the manner that wars are fought today. There are Rules, Agreements and Conventions that are designed to keep soldiers from straying over the edge into being senseless beasts. When we read the Abu Musa transcripts, we see how easy that is if the new laws etc. are ignored. The differences between armed conflict should have been taken on board when the legislation was drafted. In addition, we have been in Iraq long enough to have started the political process of how to deal with the points you make. Have you contributed your thoughts as expressed here up the Chain of Command? The soldiers fighting under the conditions you detail have very little voice. They expect their officers to deal with such matters. Reinforce the message as the time of the query and ensure that the headshed know the problem and do something. It may well be that the extension of courts martial into the ranks of commissioned officers will add some urgency to these revisions. I have. I just query how often it is that that the investigator is right there with the fighting troops. I understand we do not have enough trained investigators to achieve this depth og penetration into units. Very graphic description. I will leave it to others to confirm just how often this scenario develops, how we train and lead our officers to make hard decisions and think on their feet. I especially take the point re communications. I have heard Brigadiers fighting battles on exercise and they are really overloaded with comms.The current hoo ha was led by a situation where detainees were in very secure, safe area well within our control. The fact that a man was able to sustain over 90 bodily injuries prior to his death would suggest that it is treatment and not the physical location that matters. See my previous comment about what war is available and the comment that even in an ideal confinement space, dissidents are in danger from the men who guard them. We have the legislators. They are assisted by the various Committees. How many of our senior commanders (Prince of Darkness status) have asked to give evidence to these. You, sir, and doubtless many who feel the same way as yourself will have representatives in Parliament. How many unsatisfied soldiers have approached their MP on these matters Yes we have. The mess the Army is now in is what results when the Rules are not followed in full compliance. We Tommy Atkins do not make the rules that we have to follow. But, this is the only game in town. I know because I have done it that a soldier fully instructed in the Rules Yellow card and all the attachments who is fully and properly debriefed by a competent investigator who takes a very detailed statement will be able to show that at the time he was doing his very best to abide by his training and is not some delinquent with a weapon. Another nicety would be to remove the Army edict re minimum force and use the term the lawyers use reasonable force. The minimum is measurable generally contra-indicative to the soldier. Reasonable is something that is considered in the light of events.