British soldier executes Afghan insurgent.

[Person012345]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24639642
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24851450
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/oct/31/royal-marine-court-martial-stunned-afghan-prisoner-shooting

An injured Afghan prisoner was "executed" by a British commando, a court martial has heard.

Three Royal Marines, who cannot be named, are charged with murdering the unknown man while on duty in 2011.

One of the men, known as Marine A, is accused of shooting the prisoner in the chest at close range.

A helmet-mounted camera inadvertently filmed the incident and the footage was shown to the court. The three deny the charges against them.

Charges against two further marines - D and E - were dropped in February but the anonymity order granted last year remains in place.

Last November, Judge Advocate General Jeff Blackett said the defendants would be at "real and immediate risk" from "organised terrorist activity and lone wolves", if their names were made public.

Speaking to the board at the Military Court Centre in Bulford, Wiltshire, prosecutor David Perry said the murder took place on 15 September 2011 when the three defendants were on active service.

Basically, an severely injured Taliban member was shot in cold blood by a British Royal Marine, while being watched by two others.

Obviously, this is very bad: as the soldier himself stated, he broke the Geneva Convention. Still, though, some of the blame must be put on the extreme stress during their tour and potential PTSD. Months in a warzone seeing collleagues die is bound to change people.

Will anything major come of this, or will it just be business as usual after the trial is over? What do you think the results of the court martial will be?

We need to prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law. Demonstrate that this isn't acceptable so that we don't become like america who I've become convinced is deliberately making things worse for themselves by killing civilians and feeding the taliban with recruits so that they can funnel money into the military and defence corporations. If this doesn't happen and they get some whitewash trial then fuck the UK.

[Person012345]

So, what you're saying is, "I've never served in the military, and please keep weapons away from me".

No IM SAYING THAT THE SOLIDER DID A GREAT THING BY KILLING THAT TERRORIST

An insurgent is not necessarily a terrorist.

[Ostroeuropa]

Even completing ignoring the civil rights problem (Since other posters have dealt nicely with this.)

The actions of this soldier are simply not good for the war effort.
We lost a vital piece of evidence and information.

The soldier may have condemned more people to death by his action than just this terrorist, including citizens of the UK. And thats before we even get into the breathtaking PR coup this is going to be for the terrorists.
Even if absolutely nobody ever found out about it, he could have still indirectly killed British citizens with this act.

Coupled with the fact that this may drive up terrorist recruitment from the PR disaster, this is completely unjustifiable in any way.

Again, thats before we even acknowledge the civil rights problem.

[Person012345]

I don't see information in the OP to indicate this man was a terrorist, just because he has brown skin and is fighting against GLORIOUS WESTERN FREEDOM AND DEMOCRACY doesn't make him a terrorist.

[Ifreann]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24639642
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24851450
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/oct/31/royal-marine-court-martial-stunned-afghan-prisoner-shooting

An injured Afghan prisoner was "executed" by a British commando, a court martial has heard.

Three Royal Marines, who cannot be named, are charged with murdering the unknown man while on duty in 2011.

One of the men, known as Marine A, is accused of shooting the prisoner in the chest at close range.

A helmet-mounted camera inadvertently filmed the incident and the footage was shown to the court. The three deny the charges against them.

Charges against two further marines - D and E - were dropped in February but the anonymity order granted last year remains in place.

Last November, Judge Advocate General Jeff Blackett said the defendants would be at "real and immediate risk" from "organised terrorist activity and lone wolves", if their names were made public.

Speaking to the board at the Military Court Centre in Bulford, Wiltshire, prosecutor David Perry said the murder took place on 15 September 2011 when the three defendants were on active service.

Basically, an severely injured Taliban member was shot in cold blood by a British Royal Marine, while being watched by two others.

Obviously, this is very bad: as the soldier himself stated, he broke the Geneva Convention. Still, though, some of the blame must be put on the extreme stress during their tour and potential PTSD. Months in a warzone seeing collleagues die is bound to change people.

Will anything major come of this, or will it just be business as usual after the trial is over? What do you think the results of the court martial will be?

We need to prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law. Demonstrate that this isn't acceptable so that we don't become like america who I've become convinced is deliberately making things worse for themselves by killing civilians and feeding the taliban with recruits so that they can funnel money into the military and defence corporations. If this doesn't happen and they get some whitewash trial then fuck the UK.

The court martial was a few weeks ago. Marine A was convicted of murder and will serve a life sentence. Marines B and C were acquitted.

[The UK in Exile]

Even completing ignoring the civil rights problem (Since other posters have dealt nicely with this.)

The actions of this soldier are simply not good for the war effort.
We lost a vital piece of evidence and information.

The soldier may have condemned more people to death by his action than just this terrorist, including citizens of the UK. And thats before we even get into the breathtaking PR coup this is going to be for the terrorists.
Even if absolutely nobody ever found out about it, he could have still indirectly killed British citizens with this act.

Coupled with the fact that this may drive up terrorist recruitment from the PR disaster, this is completely unjustifiable in any way.

Again, thats before we even acknowledge the civil rights problem.

Don't get confused into thinking he was a terrorist just because people keep calling him that, in all likelyhood, he was given $10 and told to go shoot at some British troops.

[Ostroeuropa]

I don't see information in the OP to indicate this man was a terrorist, just because he has brown skin and is fighting against GLORIOUS WESTERN FREEDOM AND DEMOCRACY doesn't make him a terrorist.

Even completing ignoring the civil rights problem (Since other posters have dealt nicely with this.)

The actions of this soldier are simply not good for the war effort.
We lost a vital piece of evidence and information.

The soldier may have condemned more people to death by his action than just this terrorist, including citizens of the UK. And thats before we even get into the breathtaking PR coup this is going to be for the terrorists.
Even if absolutely nobody ever found out about it, he could have still indirectly killed British citizens with this act.

Coupled with the fact that this may drive up terrorist recruitment from the PR disaster, this is completely unjustifiable in any way.

Again, thats before we even acknowledge the civil rights problem.

Don't get confused into thinking he was a terrorist just because people keep calling him that, in all likelyhood, he was given $10 and told to go shoot at some British troops.

Fair enough. Consider it amended to enemy combatant.

[The UK in Exile]

I don't see information in the OP to indicate this man was a terrorist, just because he has brown skin and is fighting against GLORIOUS WESTERN FREEDOM AND DEMOCRACY doesn't make him a terrorist.

Don't get confused into thinking he was a terrorist just because people keep calling him that, in all likelyhood, he was given $10 and told to go shoot at some British troops.

Fair enough. Consider it amended to enemy combatant.

point being; the only intel he's likely to have is the current market rate for shooting at troops and in the context of what has been going on in afghanistan this is hardly a PR distaster. Most afghans don't like the insurgents either, most afghans just want it all to be over and on the winning side.

[Ostroeuropa]

Fair enough. Consider it amended to enemy combatant.

point being; the only intel he's likely to have is the current market rate for shooting at troops and in the context of what has been going on in afghanistan this is hardly a PR distaster. Most afghans don't like the insurgents either, most afghans just want it all to be over and on the winning side.

Well, who paid the money is also interesting. How he was contacted, etc.

[Person012345]

The court martial was a few weeks ago. Marine A was convicted of murder and will serve a life sentence. Marines B and C were acquitted.

Fair enough.

[Person012345]

Fair enough. Consider it amended to enemy combatant.

point being; the only intel he's likely to have is the current market rate for shooting at troops and in the context of what has been going on in afghanistan this is hardly a PR distaster. Most afghans don't like the insurgents either, most afghans just want it all to be over and on the winning side.

They also don't like having vast numbers of their civilians killed every year.

A lot of new recruits, from what I can gather, are also coming from around the pakistan border where the US is basically just conducting drone strikes on anything that looks remotely insurgent-like (eg. women picking vegetables). They're driving pakistanis into the taliban, and these people are not "terrorists" they just want the west to stop blowing up their families.

[The Emerald Dawn]

point being; the only intel he's likely to have is the current market rate for shooting at troops and in the context of what has been going on in afghanistan this is hardly a PR distaster. Most afghans don't like the insurgents either, most afghans just want it all to be over and on the winning side.

They also don't like having vast numbers of their civilians killed every year.

A lot of new recruits, from what I can gather, are also coming from around the pakistan border where the US is basically just conducting drone strikes on anything that looks remotely insurgent-like (eg. women picking vegetables). They're driving pakistanis into the taliban, and these people are not "terrorists" they just want the west to stop blowing up their families.

Bloody picky, aren't they?

[Wardie land]

oh well, i highly doubt the Taliban follows the Geneva convention anyway

[The Emerald Dawn]

oh well, i highly doubt the Taliban follows the Geneva convention anyway

Good for them.

We do.

[Wardie land]

oh well, i highly doubt the Taliban follows the Geneva convention anyway

Good for them.

We do.

you don't seem to understand

what im saying is theyd probably execute one of our lads if he was wounded so why shouldn't our lads do it to them? give them a taste of their own medicine

the Geneva convention only applies to wars between nations, the Taliban aren't a nation, there a terrorist rebellion

[The Emerald Dawn]

Good for them.

We do.

you don't seem to understand

what im saying is theyd probably execute one of our lads if he was wounded so why shouldn't our lads do it to them? give them a taste of their own medicine

the Geneva convention only applies to wars between nations, the Taliban aren't a nation, there a terrorist rebellion

Because we're holding ourselves to a higher standard? Because, unlike the people we're fighting against, we don't want to do monstrous things to "win"? Because, as many have pointed out, this poor berk may have just been some humptie who was given a tenner for his family and an AK, and told "shoot that way"?

[The UK in Exile]

you don't seem to understand

what im saying is theyd probably execute one of our lads if he was wounded so why shouldn't our lads do it to them? give them a taste of their own medicine

the Geneva convention only applies to wars between nations, the Taliban aren't a nation, there a terrorist rebellion

Because we're holding ourselves to a higher standard? Because, unlike the people we're fighting against, we don't want to do monstrous things to "win"? Because, as many have pointed out, this poor berk may have just been some humptie who was given a tenner for his family and an AK, and told "shoot that way"?

Well its not really a higher standard.

[The Emerald Dawn]

Because we're holding ourselves to a higher standard? Because, unlike the people we're fighting against, we don't want to do monstrous things to "win"? Because, as many have pointed out, this poor berk may have just been some humptie who was given a tenner for his family and an AK, and told "shoot that way"?

Well its not really a higher standard.

A higher standard than the Taliban, is my point.

We arrest and try people who nick a soldier and cut his head off on national TV.

[The UK in Exile]

Well its not really a higher standard.

A higher standard than the Taliban, is my point.

We arrest and try people who nick a soldier and cut his head off on national TV.

or strafe them from helicopter gunships.

[The Emerald Dawn]

A higher standard than the Taliban, is my point.

We arrest and try people who nick a soldier and cut his head off on national TV.

or strafe them from helicopter gunships.

Indeed.

[New Connorstantinople]

While this is certainly a crime, i cant help but symapthise with the soldier, and it would be a sad day when a nation demonizes its soldiers.

[The Emerald Dawn]

While this is certainly a crime, i cant help but symapthise with the soldier, and it would be a sad day when a nation demonizes its soldiers.

The fuck is lucky I wasn't in his chain of command. I do not think highly of warriors who cannot keep their shit together well enough to not kill POWs.

[Ifreann]

While this is certainly a crime, i cant help but symapthise with the soldier, and it would be a sad day when a nation demonizes its soldiers.

It was a sad day when people started making excuses for a murderer just because he's a soldier.

[New Connorstantinople]

While this is certainly a crime, i cant help but symapthise with the soldier, and it would be a sad day when a nation demonizes its soldiers.

It was a sad day when people started making excuses for a murderer just because he's a soldier.

it always angers me to see civilian populations get on their high horse about the cruelties of soldiers. War is cruel and sometimes cruel things should be done. This man HAS HOWEVER committed a crime, and should most certainly be punished. I think that the punishment should not be blown out of proportion, as i fear it now will.

[New Connorstantinople]

While this is certainly a crime, i cant help but symapthise with the soldier, and it would be a sad day when a nation demonizes its soldiers.

The fuck is lucky I wasn't in his chain of command. I do not think highly of warriors who cannot keep their shit together well enough to not kill POWs.

i fully 100% agree.