Americans, are you still proud of your soldiers?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Tingkai
Last October, the Army's Criminal Investigation Command concluded that there was probable cause to charge 27 officers and enlisted personnel with criminal offense.

So far, only the seven soldiers have been charged,

according the article you quoted, 4 of the 7 were charge LAST WEEK. So we seem to be in the very midst of the period of leveling charges. Your complaint amounts to the fact that not all were charged at the same time. What you have quoted does NOT say if the remaining 20 are not being charged (and if so, what reasons the army gives) or if there is still consideration to charging them, or even if plea bargaining negotiations are ongoing. Given that YOU do not provide this info, your call for outrage is unfounded.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Tingkai
Despite the many comments here from Americans, I still believe that most Americans believe in justice.

Rather more than you do, I think.

[Alex]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
We may be better than any other people on the face of the earth, but we're still human...

Whoa. America, the chosen people.

[Space05us]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

Americans, are you still proud of your soldiers?

Yes.

[Donegeal]

Re: Americans, are you still proud of your soldiers?

Originally posted by Tingkai
Americans, are you still proud of your soldiers?

Yes.

Now pissoff Troll.

Ignore

[JohnT]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


Why should we be? Compared to the widespread, systematic atrocities of the Taleban and Saddamite regimes, which directed and approved the atrocities committed by their forces, we have a few dozen individuals who violated standing orders and policy, and we are systematically investigating, charging, and prosecuting them.

Those few dozen are among several hundred thousand who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan, and they are being processed by the US military legal system.

You can ***** and whine about an investigating board recommending prosecution back in October and 7 of 27 being charged by May, but that's standard judicial and prosecutorial process. An investigating board's recommendation doesn't rely on the same level or standard of evidence needed to commence a General Court Martial prosecution under the UCMJ and the procedural requirements of the MCM. The pace and requirements are not a lot different in the US military legal system than they are with common criminals in the US Federal and state civilian criminal justice systems.

Oh, the pwnage! It's just too terrible to watch!

:Peeks:

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Why should we be? Compared to the widespread, systematic atrocities of the Taleban and Saddamite regimes, which directed and approved the atrocities committed by their forces, we have a few dozen individuals who violated standing orders and policy, and we are systematically investigating, charging, and prosecuting them.

A) the standard that we apply to our democratic systems are not the same that we expect from dictatorships. We put ourselves on higher moral ground, therefore we must accept the higher responsibilities.

b) There is no indication that these soldier violated standing orders. In fact, their behaviour appears to have been approved by the brass.

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Those few dozen are among several hundred thousand who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan, and they are being processed by the US military legal system.

You mean like the American pilots who clearly violated orders, killed four Canadian soldiers and then were allowed to walk away without any punishment?

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
ou can ***** and whine about an investigating board recommending prosecution back in October and 7 of 27 being charged by May, but that's standard judicial and prosecutorial process. An investigating board's recommendation doesn't rely on the same level or standard of evidence needed to commence a General Court

There are many times when people charged with a crime are found not guilty because of lack of evidence. If an investigation finds enough evidence to say that a person should be charged, then that person should be charged. That person may well be innocent, but that will be determined in court. The 27 accused may all be innocent, but that should be determined in a court of law.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Tingkai


A) the standard that we apply to our democratic systems are not the same that we expect from dictatorships. We put ourselves on higher moral ground, therefore we must accept the higher responsibilities.

b) There is no indication that these soldier violated standing orders. In fact, their behaviour appears to have been approved by the brass.

At the risk of stating the obvious, the fact we are publicizing their conduct, investigating it, and prosecuting them for it would tend to suggest we're accepting a higher level of responsibility.

There are standing orders on the handling of prisoners by US forces.

You mean like the American pilots who clearly violated orders, killed four Canadian soldiers and then were allowed to walk away without any punishment?

You mean the ones investigated, reprimanded, and who had their careers ended for doing so, although it was clear they had no specific knowledge that the soldiers attacked were friendlies and no intent to kill or attack friendlies? They ****ed up, they were negligent, and they paid with their careers and pensions, despite good and lengthy prior service records.

There are many times when people charged with a crime are found not guilty because of lack of evidence. If an investigation finds enough evidence to say that a person should be charged, then that person should be charged. That person may well be innocent, but that will be determined in court. The 27 accused may all be innocent, but that should be determined in a court of law.

Who says they won't be? The investigation board is not a general court martial convening authority, nor is it a prosecuting authority under the JAG. There is a judicial process to be followed in charging any individual under the UCMJ for any general court martial offense. There are also strategic and tactical considerations in all intelligent prosecutions (trials are time consuming and expensive), and selectively prosecuting some at the front gives you leverage for effective plea bargains at the end.

You're *****ing for the sake of *****ing, without any evidence even suggesting that any of the other 20 are going to walk.

[centrifuge]

Re: Re: Americans, are you still proud of your soldiers?

Originally posted by Donegeal


Yes.

Now pissoff Troll.

I'll 2nd that.

[Agathon]

At the risk of stating the obvious, the fact we are publicizing their conduct, investigating it, and prosecuting them for it would tend to suggest we're accepting a higher level of responsibility.

Give me a break. Scapegoats the lot of them – just like the Abu Ghraib nonsense.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Agathon

At the risk of stating the obvious, the fact we are publicizing their conduct, investigating it, and prosecuting them for it would tend to suggest we're accepting a higher level of responsibility.

Give me a break. Scapegoats the lot of them – just like the Abu Ghraib nonsense.

You mean like the way a BG was demoted and relieved of command, and a Colonel was relieved of command (both career ending moves), even though it was clear that neither ordered nor authorized the activities at Abu Ghraib? They were relieved for dereliction of duty.

Graner's doing 10 years hard time, and all these scumbags are getting negative press all over the US. Don't you think if they really had the goods on any higher-ups, their defense lawyers would be all over the press about it?

[Agathon]

You mean like the way a BG was demoted and relieved of command, and a Colonel was relieved of command (both career ending moves), even though it was clear that neither ordered nor authorized the activities at Abu Ghraib? They were relieved for dereliction of duty.

I'd love to see Rumsfeld in the Federal PITA prison. Everyone knows who's responsible. It's a pity a Georgian couldn't throw a bit straighter or one of them might have got his just deserts.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


You mean like the way a BG was demoted and relieved of command, and a Colonel was relieved of command (both career ending moves), even though it was clear that neither ordered nor authorized the activities at Abu Ghraib? They were relieved for dereliction of duty.

I was rather more impressed that they did something to Pappas, than that they demoted Karpinski. Karpinski was a reserve General, a woman, and had scapegoat written all over. Pappas was not only an active, but was in the Intell chain of command.

[Odin]

I have a friend who served in Afganistan and he was horified when he heard about Abu Grahib (and hates Rummy's guts because of it). so don't give me the "the US military are a bunch of evil sadists" claptrap. Most soldiers are good people.

[Odin]

Originally posted by Agathon

It's a pity a Georgian couldn't throw a bit straighter or one of them might have got his just deserts.

Yup, give the Neo-cons an excuse to turn us into a police state. Smart idea.