Canadian sniper cleared of desecrating al-Qaeda body

National Post ^ | February 8, 2003 | Stewart Bell

[sneakypete]

I hear you, but I understand that many of the hijackers did not know about the plan....So maybe we should not abandon our values and keep up the good old americian values

Maybe we should take any prisoners we capture,and put them into consueling? Pay Dr.Phil and Oprah to take care of them and explain to them that none of this was really THEIR fault,but the fault of their parents for inflicting a deprived childhood on them? We could even pay the SS disability,and provide them with free housing,medical care,food stamps,subsidized rent,preference in college admissions,etc,etc,etc. OR,we could just kill the SOB's.

[sneakypete]

Bin Laden himself said the plane bombers didn't know their mission until they boarded.

They didn't know specifics because they didn't care. They DID know they would be "striking a blow against America and killing Americans",and that's all they needed to know to volunteer.

So how can some Afghani running around in the hills be aware, much less responsible?

You ain't been paying attention,have you? They teach holy war in their mosques,and pray for your destruction several times a day. This is what is uniting them.

[sneakypete]

You need a break from FR, mate. You're completely unrecognisable as the commonsense and rational piasa we knew from a year or two ago.

He makes perfect sense. Byron,it is clear you have no understanding of guerilla warfare,or how to counter it. You mean well,but are wrong.

[sneakypete]

The same person who will desecrate a human body after death is the same type who would torture one alive and act based upon emotion and vengeance in combat. He's the same type of person who would run from enemy fire and abandon his comrades in arms if they need fire support.

If he descerates the enemy's body, it's only a matter of time before he desecrates his friends.

Where the hell are you getting this stuff from? It sure as hell ain't based on fact.

[sneakypete]

You have a problem with Al Qaeda terrorists being tortured to save thousands of American lives?

WHOA,there,Bucko! There is a HUGE difference between sending the enemy a psychologocal warfare message by doing something like taking a dump on one of their bodies,and torturing a live enemy prisoner!

[Luis Gonzalez]

Thank you for reminding everyone that we are the higher standard.

[Luis Gonzalez]

So you believe that we should become the kinds of animals that you despise?

We do that, and we lost the fight.

WEe ARE the higher standard.

[mosby]

Well said. On that note I'm out of here. Everything's been said that can be said. Nothing I've read has changed my mind on this. In the end result military justice did the right thing, which I guess is a positive.

[Luis Gonzalez]

So then, you would punish a pedophile by raping his children?

Would you punish a drug dealer by selling drugs to his kids?

The members of the US Armed Forces on this thread understand honor, and they are telling you that what you advocate is wrong.

Listen to them.

[sneakypete]

My dad [former Recon Marine] chopped off VC limbs, ears etc etc. as well as tortured captured gooks for intel.

HorseHillary! Recon teams do NOT torture POW's,period! Number 1,they are in the enemy territory by mission definition,and they can't afford the noise. Number 2 is their duty is to return POW's to the rear ASAP so that intelligence officers can question them. Number 3 is it is a HELL of a lot harder for a small force to capture a enemy soldier than most people think .Number 4 is a POW is a incredible danger to your team,since he slows you down and and takes away the focus of at least one of your team members who has to watch him all the time. Nobody with the brains Gawd gave a pissant stayed in the bush a instant longer than they had to once they captured a prisoner. You called in for a extraction so you could get him back to the base camp so the intel people could pick his brain as soon as possible. Number 5 is a tortured enemy will tell you anything you want him to tell you in order to make the pain stop,so nothing he tells you has any value.

He may well have cut some ears off. I remember hearing a LOT of these BS stories,but never once ran into anybody who personally knew somebody who bothered with this nonsense. ESPECIALLY not recon people,who generally have to haul ass after a firefight,and are lucky to have enough time for a document search. These stories started because some of the CIA teams in the early days were supposedly paid for body counts,so bringing back ears was a way for the indig to get paid for killing a enemy soldier. All a American would have gotten for having a cutoff ear would have been a courtmartial. As for cutting off limbs,what would even be the purpose of that?

[Luis Gonzalez]

"Jihadis should be thankful they have to deal the military and not with the civilians of the countries they have been killing."

Jihadis ARE civilians for the most part, and from the looks of the posts on this thread, we have a lot more in common with them that we are willing to admit.

Thank God that those members of our Armed Forces present understand that this is about our standards, and our honor.

[Burkeman1]

Thanks for the post in support. We need to suppport each other.

[Luis Gonzalez]

I wonder if the people on this thread who advocate desecrating the honor of the US military by behaving like the animals they say the enemy is, would also believe that the best way to punish a man who rapes children is to rape his children?

[sneakypete]

In particular, spies have always been subject to summary judgement and execution.

Yup,executing them would be perfectly legal under the rules of land warfare,but torturing them would NOT be legal. It would be a war crime.

[sneakypete]

It says you can't mutilate their corpses,

Where?

[sneakypete]

The Aussies at Long Tan did not embrace the enemy in so loving a way...why should we?

The Australian SAS warrant officers I trained with near Saigon surely weren't delicate individuals.

[sneakypete]

What war crime? There was an accusation of a war crime, followed by a trial, followed (in this particular case) by an acquittal.

WHOA! Let's back up,here! He MAY have been charged with comitting a war crime according to the internal laws on Canada,but he didn't commit a war crime according to international law,and as far as I know he wasn't accused of comitting a war crime. I suspect he was charged with something like the Canadian version of "Conduct unbecoming a soldier",or "Acts contrary to good order and disclipline". People can project that into a war crime if they want,but that doesn't make it so.

[justshutupandtakeit]

If we are willing to incinerate thousands of men, women and children (and we have in the past) I cannot get very upset with a guy taking a dump on a PoS. That is so far down on my outrage list that I won't become apoplextic about it during this lifetime. It might be unnecessary but some don't care for icing on their cake either.

[sneakypete]

Likewise, remarking about a Chaplain in a battle zone in the language referenced is disrepectful to authority. Gross lack of discipline. Considering he is a sniper who must act independently, if true, he needs to be relieved of duty and punished for disrespect, possibly removed from service as an example to his peers of conduct not tolerable, let alone condoned in combat.

I'm sure all of this would have happened if he had of been a Al Qaeda soldier who had been disrespectful to a fundie Muslim Chaplin. Most likely they would have executed him on the spot. Then again,THEY want a religious police state. Is that what YOU want? It sure sounds like it.

[sneakypete]

It was made because of the Chaplain was there. And he is accountable for that.

So what? Who the hell is the Chaplin,anyway? Other than a parasite,that is. "Disrespectful" is as close as I've ever came to praising the bastards.