Robert Semrau is now a civilian, he shouldn’t be, but he is.
He was convicted of disgraceful conduct for a battlefield mercy-killing. The enemy soldier that he killed was severely wounded, disemboweled and one leg shot off. The AFA Commander said that the enemy wounded would neither be treated nor evacuated.
“The Afghan soldiers readied the wounded soldier for death by wrapping his head in a scarf”. He was going to die, a horrible painful death that might have lasted hours. Capt. Robert Semrau put his life on the line and led by example. He made a difficult choice that day and stands by it.
I’ve put serious thought into this; I believe what he did was right. If I were to be mortally wounded, no chance for survival and in agony, I would bless the person that showed mercy and put me out of my misery.
As far as I’m concerned, the “disgraceful conduct” has been committed by those who have condemned Capt. Semrau. A bunch of desk-bound politically oriented bureaucrats, who have never been in a theater of war, let alone on the front lines. How were they able to judge him? Wasn’t there any Command Level combat veteran Officers available? Oh… right, he might have gotten off, can’t have that now can we?
I know life isn’t fair, but this takes it to a whole new level of WTF. Robert Semrau is the type of soldier that I would want on my 6, anytime.
To Capt. Robert Semrau and all our personnel who are in harm’s way, God bless and stay strong.—Not So Proud Vet – aka Hugo
This article appears in Sep 30 – Oct 6, 2010.
Excellent bitch Hugo. Thank you for your service.
i concur, nicely bitched sir hugo
One man’s mercy killing is another man’s execution without due process. Sorry Sir Hugo, can’t agree with you on this one. No doubt Capt S was/is an excellent soldier, but what he did was morally and legally wrong. Hate to say it but I wonder (and this is not directed at you SH, just in general) whether he would have as much sympathy if he and his wife were not so damn hot looking.
He can also appeal to The Court Martial Court of Appeals, and then ultimtely as with all citizens, The Supreme Court of Canada, so the matter is not over with.
Excellent post, Hugo.
Yup, can’t argue that. 100% agreed.
agreed
As the former lover of a Navy man and a strong supporter of ‘the boots on the ground’, I wonder why most of us never heard any of this? More DND censorship? I agree with you Hugo.
Due process? The man was dying. If your entrails are hanging out and you’re begging for death I can’t imagine you give a crap about ‘due process’. I wouldn’t.
And Hugo: Thanks! <3
TBR, if this is the first you’ve heard of this then you’ve been living under a rock. It’s been in the papers and all the other media from before the Court Martial onward.
Amazing post. Slow clap into standing ovation!
yeah, i can see that happening. there was a few in the falklands that were in the same state. a quick shot to head, is preferable over a ot of long suffering. mercy killing no, just being helpful. i’ve seen a bit of shit like this years ago.
>sigh< thanks BT for reading that totally wrong. I have known of the court martial et al. It was the first I have heard of the specifics (ie mercy killing etc.). Thanks for the insult, and making me feel like shit.
Eh ignore BT, TBR. He just likes to be contradictory on purpose.
I like Hugo’s post but I’m in complete agreement with Commoner. This so-called mercy killing is the next person’s execution. None of us were there so we don’t know how it went down. For all we know the deceased could have been healthy and Semaru decided it was more fun to shoot him a few times for shits giggles. That’s the fucked up and fundamental reality of the situation; none of us know what happened in the incident for sure.
Totenkopf: you’re the definition of loser, loser. I bet you cross the street when you see a woman in a hijab walking towards you on the same block, coward.
look it’s the cat with the green turtleneck…occifer timmy, il est pas mechant. squack
Okay PG… here he is again 🙂
(and I swear that’s what I think of when I see it!)
what a scushy face. woof…i understand what you’re saying fat, i guess i just hope that people are truly compassionate *sigh*
I wonder how many North Americans would call a Jihadist a hero for the “mercy-killing” of a NATO soldier if the situation was reversed. The white/north-american/christian double standard is showing.
i see your point but please don’t call me a christer^^^
I wish that there was due process before every trigger was pulled.
I wish that there was due process before every button was pushed.
I wish that there was due process before every mine was set.
I truly do.
But it’s war, normal rules don’t apply.
If morality ruled; there would be no war.
As far as how thing went down, all parties agree, take a read.
It’s not like he posed for a pic, bragged that he “bagged a rag”, or opened up with a 50 cal on a group of un-armed civilians.
Nobody has refuted his testimony.
If the situation were reversed, do you think that the Jihadist would even put their guy on trial?
Wasn’t calling you that, PG 🙂 You heathen, you lol jk.
no of course not hugo, all i have is an image of a man with his guts hanging out in battle
TBR, I wasn’t being insulting but it has been in the news since before the Court Martial and it was reported that he allegedly shot him because of the mortal wounds.
The Court Martial did not convict him of murder, manslaughter, attempted murder (in others words they knew what he did, but can’t condone it), he was convicted on a lesser charge of conduct unbecoming. Had he been convicted of any of the other charges, he would have been serving time first in the military prison in Edmonton, then a federal pen after two years less a day, maybe sooner. And believe you me you do not want to do time in Edmonton.
Just because the enemy doesn’t follow the rules doesn’t mean we shouldn’t. Would you like to see the police take the law into their own hands. I wouldn’t. Just as wouldn’t want to see our people engaging in acts that we would abhor at home. It’s not easy or always fair but who said life was.
“Just because the enemy doesn’t follow the rules doesn’t mean we shouldn’t. Would you like to see the police take the law into their own hands. I wouldn’t. Just as wouldn’t want to see our people engaging in acts that we would abhor at home. It’s not easy or always fair but who said life was.”
Bingo bango. Especially the first two lines, BT.
And here is the part of the National Defence Act he was convicted on. Section 129 states:
Conduct to the Prejudice of Good Order and Discipline
Prejudicing good order or discipline
129. (1) Any act, conduct, disorder or neglect to the prejudice of good order and discipline is an offence and every person convicted thereof is liable to dismissal with disgrace from Her Majesty’s service or to less punishment.
Offence and contraventions prejudicial to good order and discipline
(2) An act or omission constituting an offence under section 72 or a contravention by any person of
(a) any of the provisions of this Act,
(b) any regulations, orders or instructions published for the general information and guidance of the Canadian Forces or any part thereof, or
(c) any general, garrison, unit, station, standing, local or other orders,
is an act, conduct, disorder or neglect to the prejudice of good order and discipline.
Attempts to commit offences
(3) An attempt to commit any of the offences prescribed in sections 73 to 128 is an act, conduct, disorder or neglect to the prejudice of good order and discipline.
Saving provision
(4) Nothing in subsection (2) or (3) affects the generality of subsection (1).
Not intended to cover offences elsewhere provided for
(5) No person may be charged under this section with any offence for which special provision is made in sections 73 to 128 but the conviction of a person so charged is not invalid by reason only of the charge being in contravention of this subsection unless it appears that an injustice has been done to the person charged by reason of the contravention.
Officer’s responsibility not affected
(6) The responsibility of any officer for the contravention of subsection (5) is not affected by the validity of any conviction on the charge in contravention of that subsection.
R.S., c. N-4, s. 119.
Offences Punishable by Ordinary Law
Service trial of civil offences
130. (1) An act or omission
(a) that takes place in Canada and is punishable under Part VII, the Criminal Code or any other Act of Parliament, or
(b) that takes place outside Canada and would, if it had taken place in Canada, be punishable under Part VII, the Criminal Code or any other Act of Parliament,
is an offence under this Division and every person convicted thereof is liable to suffer punishment as provided in subsection (2).
Punishment
(2) Subject to subsection (3), where a service tribunal convicts a person under subsection (1), the service tribunal shall,
(a) if the conviction was in respect of an offence
(i) committed in Canada under Part VII, the Criminal Code or any other Act of Parliament and for which a minimum punishment is prescribed, or
(ii) committed outside Canada under section 235 of the Criminal Code,
impose a punishment in accordance with the enactment prescribing the minimum punishment for the offence; or
(b) in any other case,
(i) impose the punishment prescribed for the offence by Part VII, the Criminal Code or that other Act, or
(ii) impose dismissal with disgrace from Her Majesty’s service or less punishment.
Code of Service Discipline applies
(3) All provisions of the Code of Service Discipline in respect of a punishment of imprisonment for life, for two years or more or for less than two years, and a fine, apply in respect of punishments imposed under paragraph (2)(a) or subparagraph (2)(b)(i).
Saving provision
(4) Nothing in this section is in derogation of the authority conferred by other sections of the Code of Service Discipline to charge, deal with and try a person alleged to have committed any offence set out in sections 73 to 129 and to impose the punishment for that offence described in the section prescribing that offence.
R.S., 1985, c. N-5, s. 130; 1998, c. 35, ss. 33, 92.
We called it the catchall section.
OP, I agree.
Lifesucks is correct abouth the Falklands. After the Battle of Goose Green Argentine prisoners were being used to move their munitions from the village school. This was a violation of the Geneva convention, but so was using the school as an ammo dump. At any rate, the school building, those parts of it that hadn’t been used as a latrine by the Argentinians was the only building in the settlement large enough to accomodate them and shelter them from the South Atlantic winter. There was an explosion and one man was essentially eviscerated, with his legs blown off but clearly still alive and screaming in agony. He was surrounded by unexploded ordnance and burning gorse brush. A Paratrooper Sergeant didn’t hesitate; he put 2 rounds in the the Argentine’s head sparing him a slower, crueler death. There was an inquiry. The Para was judged to have acted appropriately in the circumstances. So, in my opinion and based on all available evidence did Captain Semerau. I agree that we don’t want to sink to level of the enemy, but summary execution is probably the most humane fate a NATO soldier could look forward to in the hands of jihadis.
And I can’t speak for Totenkopf, but my main reaction to a woman wearing a mask or a tent is gratitude. Thank you, oh thank you, for not provoking my uncontrollable male lust. >; )
Touchy subject to be sure. I fully suuport our troops and the mission in Afghanistan. I have a hard time supporting summary execution however.
I have asked myself the question, “does our ability and willingness to prosecute our soldiers for deeds done in war increase our morality?” the answer I keep coming to is yes. There is a reason we are the good guys, and good reasons to continue to humanize and modernize our armed forces (and their conduct).
I understand war is hell, and no one who isn’t in their ‘boots’ will ever fully understand it, or be able to rationalize the terrible decisions one must make when faced with the horrors they witness.
I guess my own position on battlefield euthanasia confuses even me. I would hope if I was wounded to be afforded every available effort to save my life. I would understand someones decision to request the end of their life. I am hugely torn as to the level of compassions we show our enemy, and part of me thinks double tapping the wounded very appropriate. But it all comes back to being the good guy, which we are, and which we have to be.
The real tragedy here is that witness’ testified against Semrau. We will never understand what happened that day, but if this was justified by whatever ‘code’ applies in the heat of battles, why did they talk?
The forces had to make a very tough decision here, one that I agree with. The fact that it reached a trial, with witness’ forces the militaries hand. They cannot allow summary executions (or we are no better than them), but with the judgement delivered it is clear they understand they will never know what happened(malicious vs compassion).
I guess I am proud of our forces’ ability to elevate the ugly ugly business of war just a little bit. I am personnaly saddened by Semrau’s outcome, but I understand it.
Walter
Totenkopf: you’re the definition of loser, loser. I bet you cross the street when you see a woman in a hijab walking towards you on the same block, coward
no i only cross the road when i see a big fat ass walking on the same side as me.not enough room see.
i wonder how you fat assess clean those hard to reach places, or if you actually do.probably not very effecient as that last bitch made clear.many bed sores there fatty.do yourself a favour, there grease factory,and help our health care,cut down on them cheeseburgers, and start off with walks, then with a little discipline,(which you most likely lack), you may even be able to run.anyhow get some pride in yourself sow.
Excellent point Hugo.
Good post, couldn’t agree more. It takes courage to go against what is legally permissible and do what is morally right. That soldier was circling the drain, to force him to endure the pain and misery he was in would have been cruel and unusual. People need to take a step back and stop thinking “live at all cost”
What would make me extremely happy , would be for another Canadian soldier to be brought to courtmarshal , for letting a mortally wounded enemy suffer in excrutiating agony for several hours while he slowly dies from wounds that just cannot be repaired.
Yes indeed , charge him with torture, for just letting this mortally wounded enemy fighter succumb in excrutiating agony.
That IMO would be awsome…As a battlefeild soldier, you would then be DAMNED if you did & DAMNED if you didn’t
do anything
THis soldier , did the right thing. He humanly put a person who was definately going to die out of his misery. He should have got a medal !
An extremely difficult decision/situation for this soldier. But regardless, I agree with the ruling and disagree with the OP.
Just because something gives you the touchy-feely impression of “goodness” does NOT make it right.
What are this soldiers credentials for diagnosing and prognosticating this enemies injuries? I am a Canadian trained physician and I still have alot of difficulty predicting medical outcome in the heat of the moment.
Some people come into the trauma bay COVERED in blood and you would swear they are goners. Later on do you find out they only have a scalp laceration…
Regardless, mercy-killing/summary execution of enemies or friends alike CANNOT be allowed. Period. Otherwise every 18 year old private is shouldered with the responsibility of judge, jury and executioner.
That is not right and a pandora’s box of ethical quagmires.
It would be hard to suffer a painful death when you could be ‘put down’ quickly. Yet we forbid exactly that in our society here. The ICU is full of people who probably wont live and are suffering. Why wouldn’t we just kill them all?
Because sometimes we are wrong. And death is irreversible.
I think I understand your point More, but I would say there are few in this country who understand the concept of “Damned if you do; damned if you don’t” better than members of our military. They have experienced it far too often, and they have seen the politicians, senior DND bureaucrats and yes, top brass, who set them up for this situation get off scot free. Far too many times. IMO.
when i was trained in ambushes,there where 2 orders:
1:no survivors,meaning after the initial ambush we were expected to walk through the ambush area and make sure there where no survivors.
2:leave the wounded behind, no matter their condition,for our enemy to deal with.
i wonder if they still teach canadian soldiers order 1 in ambushes. it would be a bad thing if they do not.
Westcoastkid. The touchy feely solution would have been for a helicopter dustoff to have have taken the Taliban to a NATO hospital, saved his life and sent him back to his village with a revised outlook on the “infidel feringhee crusaders.” It wasn’t feasible. His own fellow countrymen and co-religionists were prepared to leave him to become jackal shit. Captain Semerau and his men were part of a mentoring unit attached to an Afghan National Army battalion and as such, probably had low priority on air-evac assets, even had they been willing to risk further attack by remaining in place until a medevac could be aranged. A difficult call, to be sure.
I’m not going to presume to lecture a physician on the realities of an ER ward or trauma unit, but I’m willing to bet that in terms of chaos, and quick life or death decisions, it doesn’t hold a candle to a battlefield. And there is a major difference between that and the controlled conditions of a hospital ICU so the comparison is not particularly valid. Army medics, far from rear area support facilities have long understood that sometimes mercy killing with bullet or morphine is the only answer to prevent further suffering. In WW2 German Army medics carried sidearms, not to protect themselves or the wounded, but to kill them if they were in danger of falling in Soviet hands. And, no doubt, Red Army medics did the same. The reality is that when the shooting starts every 18 year old private has been elevated , within the limits of his chain of command, to the position of judge, jury and executioner. And that is how it has to be.
This is a clear cut case of do not judge a man until you’ve stood in his shoes and I , for one, am prepared to take Captain Semerau at his word.
“This is a clear cut case of do not judge a man until you’ve stood in his shoes and I , for one, am prepared to take Captain Semerau at his word.”
There is no defense in his words for his actions.
I am prepared to accept “ignorance is bliss”.
I question why and how the world learned of the events Semrau has been blamed with. Once public, there is nothing the CDN forces, or any modern military could do but move ahead with charges. We can not allow our soldiers to have carte blanche execution powers, and we are morally right to prosecute offenders.
If this had stayed on the battlefield, where it belonged, then the only persons having to live with it were the witness’ and no one would have been the wiser. The point here is someone wasn’t satisfied, someone was offended, and outed the actions of Semrau – which are wrong, and once public must be dealt with. The fact that some witness’ couldnt handle what happened proves even more his actions were unjust.
The trial has allowed us to stand in his shoes, and thus judge him, as he has been.
The lesson here? be careful whom witness’ you shooting unarmed prisoners. And further to that, don’t take any.
Well, that is your perspective on the situation, Ivan.
I disagree, but that is fine.
The accepted and legal thing for the soldier to do would have been to walk away. Just as the accepted and legal thing for ME to do with a dying patient is to administer care as the patient requests or refuses, to stop when things are futile, and to treat symptoms to strive for comfort and dignity.
It is ILLEGAL and technically murder for me to administer anything with the intent or expected outcome of hastening death – even in a terminally ill patient. Whether that ‘feels’ like the right thing to do at the time is irrelevant.
The same applies on the battlefield. That is why I agree with the ruling. I’m not saying this soldier is a bad person. But he broke the protocol and deviated from international standards and law. Of that he is guilty. There is no question.
The question is: should the conventions be revised to give soldiers the authority and impetus to execute wounded enemy (or friendly?) soldiers on the battlefield? I would argue, no. But then again I am not a soldier. Maybe I would think differently if I were.
People have to look beyond this particular case…take a step back and look at the big picture. Imagine what kind of precedent this would create in military law if Capt Semrau had not been reprimanded for his actions. Could we expect an increase in the number of mercy killings? Maybe. Of those new cases of mercy killings, how many would be legitimate? Hard to tell. What would be the outside perception of Canada’s adherence to the Law of Armed conflict? Probably not the same. It would open a whole new can of worms. There is a thing called the law of armed conflicts, that a number of nations adhere to (including Canada). It states, among other things, that you must care for wounded prisoners the same way you would care for your own personel. Which means that Capt Semrau’s best course of action, in this situation, was to perform first aid and seek medical help for this man. Period. Capt Semrau is an infanteer, not a medic: he is not qualified to make a medical diagnosis (as mentionned by Westcoastkid)…no matter how obvious the fate of the wounded is. That’s the law. That’s his obligation as a soldier.
Legally, what he did was wrong. Morally? That’s debatable. I think only those that witnessed the scene are in a position to determine wether or not he did the “right thing” given the situation. I wasn’t there, none of us were. Capt Semrau knew of the potential consequences of his actions before doing what he did: all soldiers are briefed on law of armed conflicts and ROE before deploying. It’s surprising how many are ready to vouch for the guy, although none of you know him. You can’t really comment on the man’s character unless you’ve served alongside of him. It’s easy to get emotionnal looking at such a case. What folks have to understand is the decision of the military judge has impacts that go far beyond Capt Semrau’s private life.
Totenkopf: Piss off. You received your “ambush training” on your fucking X-Box. You’re only a special forces soldier in your imaginary world. If you’re going to impersonate military personel, get the lingo down first, idiot. Do the time if you want the bragging rights, you phony. Here’s a suggestion for an interesting adventure: have a local print shop make you a t-shirt that says “JTF 2” on it. Then book yourself a weekend in Ottawa, and hit the bars in Ottawa and Gatineau. Let me know if you make it back to your mother’s basement.
Maybe I would too, WCK.
i agree with the OP. First off you cannot reasonably compare Policing here at home to military action abroad, thats just rediculous. 2nd, it isnt really appropriate or even accurate to use the term Summary Execution as witnesses testified the enemy soldier was severly and/or mortally wounded. The soldier was not shot simply because he was the enemy(summary execution)…he was shot because he was wounded to a point where it was agreed that he would not survive. The evidence of that is the state in which he was left by his comrades. To be honest this should never have even gotten outside the people who were there. The fact that it did is a disgrace in itself. Honestly if he did shoot him unarmed and if he was in perfect health i would still be all for it. I would understand then if a court martial happened but i would still agree with the act just the same. Personally i am more of a just drop the bomb and lets go the fuck home kinda guy myself but hey …thats just one mans opinion. Witnesses say he was severely wounded ..sums that part up quite nicely. So the there is no debate wether it was a mercy killing or not. The only debate now is wether a mercy killing is acceptable.
Totenkopf..good point…
NGF your argument is out the window.
And for everyone else the only people who should have the right to determine what is and is not acceptable and reasonable on a field of battle are people who have actually spent time on one.
and fat…this statement you quoted from another…”Just because the enemy doesn’t follow the rules doesn’t mean we shouldn’t. Would you like to see the police take the law into their own hands. I wouldn’t. Just as wouldn’t want to see our people engaging in acts that we would abhor at home.” It’s not easy or always fair but who said life was.” The laws are actually what is protecting these swarmers(example) and preventing them from being “dealt with” so in actuality we dont want law enforcement having a free for all but they are definitely handcuffed by the very laws they are trying to enforce. So somewhere in between would be acceptable i think. And dont kid yourself…Our people and every other military out there commits acts that a normal civilian might turn a cheek to every day we just dont hear about it. There are unwritten rules in battle and one was broken …thus we har about this. This incident leaking out is simply a rare exception that the armed forces reluctantly has to act on. In a silent vote, every person responsible for handing down the verdict would applaud this Semrau for his actions and pat him on the back, dont think for a second they wouldnt.
Shaker, your logic is flawed.
“And for everyone else the only people who should have the right to determine what is and is not acceptable and reasonable on a field of battle are people who have actually spent time on one.”
So the acts of torture and cruelty perpetrated by German and Japanese soldiers during WWII are acceptable and reasonable, because these two countries have spent “time on a battlefield” ? Some battlefields happen to be located in urban areas, with civilians still there. Without the Geneva convention and other laws, it’s an all-you-can-kill buffet with no one being accountable for his actions. Not what we Canadians stand for.
“In a silent vote, every person responsible for handing down the verdict would applaud this Semrau for his actions and pat him on the back, dont think for a second they wouldnt.”
Don’t be so sure. If everybody was so unanimous that this was not ethically questionable, it wouldn’t have been brought forward. This case is a divisive one, even (and especially) among the military. I’m not speculating or being an armchair coach here, I am currently serving.
Further, think about this. Instead of an ISAF soldier putting an enemy out of their misery, make it an enemy soldier putting one of ours out of his or her misery. I wonder what people would think then. We are not them. We do not threaten people with death for voting. We do not rape and punish women for going to school or work. We do not kill enemies that have surrendered or are wounded. If we do, we are no better.
Wow. Great responces people, both sides. I have some archive digging to do before I reply to most.
Paingirl – you mentioned the Hound – if you’re in the neighbourhood much, chances are that you’ve seen Blue:)
TheBlackRose – (Rocky from Bugs Bunny voice) – I don’t nose hows ya done it, but Iz nose ya done it.
I caught your cold 🙁 hot-toddy-night 🙂
i make a trek out to zee hound two to three times a month. i live in haliafx…i have a sinus infection, it’s ’cause all the wee ones are back to book learnin. lovin the avatar. except for the odd bit of name calling this thread is awesome as are the abortion threads. keep on keepin on thinking…screee
How many people had I already killed? There were those six that I knew about for sure. Close enough to blow their last breath in my face. But this time, it was an American and an officer. That wasn’t supposed to make any difference to me, but it did. Shit… charging a man with murder in this place was like handing out speeding tickets in the Indy 500. I took the mission. What the hell else was I gonna do?
Aw, now I can’t get Jim Fucking Morrison out of my head. Somebody, please shoot me. >; )
Here you go Ivan.
Another cover.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGho1QZO4Us
Shaker spells ‘ridiculous’ as ‘rediculous’; therefore any point he/she makes is obsolete. And, yes, in the real world being able to spell properly matters.
Totenkopf: you’re still a loser and always will be.
my last post about viet nam is gone, what happened moddy?
Totenkopf you seem like a racist, judgemental prick. That was an idiotic joke written under a serious post.
Hugo, great post and I fully agree with what you wrote.
“I know what I said, now I must scream of the overdose and the lack of mercy killings. Mercy killings…killings…killings. Next thing you know, they’ll take my thoughts away.”
Frenchie nobody said anything about torture and cruelty being universally acceptable. Not sure where you are getting that. Personally i feel cruelty is not acceptable, but one mans cruelty is another mans mercy. Torture really depends on why the person is being tortured. People are tortured all the time for valuable information. It has saved countless lives. It is an unpleasant thought but one is clouded if they think it it doesnt happen and has no place. And you are generalizing quite a bit here. I merely stated that soldiers…individual soldiers who have spent time out in the field, regardless of country or age, are better suited to provide a fair judgement in cases like this.
Whomever brought this out in the open is just too soft to be in the military.
Fat it is a real shame that the only thing you can manage to contribute to intelligent debate here or in any other bitch is your red pen and the odd witty jibe. This isnt an essay contest and nobody is being graded on their patience with spellchecking….maybe their intelligence, which based on your track record around here doesnt bode well for you. If you can’t come up with something worthwhile on your own, go copy and paste something from the internet and use it.
Copying/pasting from the Internet isnt my schtick. ANd I wouldn’t feel better by adopting your strategy. I’m better than that 🙂 Unlike you I’m not rediculous.
The soldier no doubt had taken into consideration the result of his action, an officer has a better working knowledge of the QR&O’s than enlisted men, and he went and carried out the mercy killing anyway. Was he right to do it? Yes. Was it something that ‘the guys behind the desks’ should try him for? Unfortunately, yes. The Canadian Forces is an extension of our gov’t and the Canadian people. We don’t kill people with ALS or other terminal illnesses. Yah, it was a battlefield decision, but that’s the way it goes. I’m sure there’s lots of chatter in the messes over this, next time let ’em rot.
“Whomever brought this out in the open is just too soft to be in the military.”
Whomever brought this out in the open may have done the right thing considering the unique circumstances that nobody on this board has witnessed first hand.
“too soft to be in the military”. It’s funny those on this board that are obviously active members of the Forces (myself and Bro Tim) are in disagreement with you. Perhaps your understanding of the military is too heavily influenced by Hollywood and needs adjustment. We signed the dotted line and understand the responsibilities that come with this contract…Soldiers are responsible for their actions. So much so that soldiers have a responsibility to disobey unlawful orders. That’s right. If my boss tells me to harm a civilian, or finish off a prisoner, I have the responsibility to disobey him, tell him to fuck right off and contact the next guy above him in the food chain to prevent this unlawful order from being executed. Many civilians don’t understand this concept. It’s not a video game where you are given a rifle and your uniform is a license to kill anything that stands in your way.
It’s not about being too soft, it’s about responsible use of force. The only way you could ever understand is by serving in the military yourself.
And that’s all I have to say about that.
I’m retired Frenchie, but you’re absolutely right. But ya just gotta love video game or paintball warriors. They may be fun to play but has absolutely no bearing in the real world.
Even the video programs the military use in training (though pretty good) does not translate into reality. It cannot adequately reproduce the sounds of war and pain and the smell cannot be replicated. Even though the make up used for casualties is excellent, the real thing is just different.
I did not know you were retired CF, BT. And major post. I agree. I was watching a commercial the other night where US soldiers were talking about an upcoming game where the action is apparently the most realistic so far. Props.
I’ll explain what happened at the Court Martial, even though it wasn’t spoken or written for obvious reasons. He was found not guilty of the more serious charges including murder. I have no doubt the reasoning was they understood what he had did and maybe he even did it out of compassion, however they cannot condone it. That is why he was convicted of the less serious charge. In a way they did it as a favour to keep him out of prison. As I said earlier, he has the right to appeal the verdict (providing there are grounds as per any appeal) to the Court Martial Court of Appeal and ultimately the Supreme Court of Canada.
Had he been acquitted of all charges, it would be saying to the troops that they would have pretty well carte blanche to do anything and we do not fight wars that way. Germany and Japan were nortorious for murdering (and yes there is a distinction between being killed in battle and murdered) our troops (whether wounded or not). I for one would be ashamed of being a part of a military like that. I was incensed when the Somali incident happened but it was wrong to have disbanded the Airbourne for the actions of a few. Though this did help change the way the Military Police did business. Before only an officer or Cammanding Officer (this could be a non-commissioned officer)could lay charges, the MPs could not. Now the MPs have the authority to lay charges just like the civilian police forces. This has done a lot to keep incidents from being swept under the rug. Are the MPs perfect? Nope, but neither are civilian forces or anyone else for that matter.
Do they still call MP’s “Meatheads”?
Unless the price of meat is too high then it’s bonehead.
Me best mate Martin sez ‘e ‘ad the best time them ‘ot countries keepin’ tha locals in line.
“Bloody kids wiv guns Eddie” is wot ‘e said. “Never saw the like of it. Bloody Hell!”
Martin never got to Somalia.
Funny tho’. I wuz rearranging volumes in me fav bookstore in town ‘ere and I hears this yobbo say ‘e wuz ready to “take to the streets in armed insurrection” when they disbanded the Airborne.
Me mate Martin would ‘ave shown ‘im a thing or two about insurrection. Bloody yobbo. Martin would ‘ave laid some argy bargy on tha’ twit.
That’s Martin. “Can’t stand a fool” sez Martin.
Eddie my old son, I think we’ve met. Next time say ‘ello and we’ll go for a Guinness. Bring Martin, too. No argy-bargy; just a couple of pints and some Steffi Grafs.
…and I believe that my exact phrase was “I wanted to drive a Ryder truck full of chemical fertilizer and heating oil into the lobby of the House of Cunts and shove the keys up Jean Poutine’s Khyber Pass. >: )
Fuck you Tim for screwing up a perfectly good heart-felt emotional bitch; with logic.
The Canadian Airborne Regiments’ fuck-up in Somalia is something that will never be forgotten. So yes, even the appearance of impropriety must be avoided. Point very well taken.
One man’s mercy killing is another man’s execution – pro-lifers can say the same about abortion.
w-c-k; ever hear of triage? There has just been a major accident; your ER is about to recieve 30 casualties, you have 2 ORs’ & 4 Doctors, what do you do?
You let the “unsavable” die.
Do you let them scream away their last minutes of life, or offer them some relief?
I don’t know what Ivory Tower you work in, but get rid of those rose coloured glasses and take a look at the real world. Touchy-feely, my ass.
The Capt., not only can he appeal (not likely to get the desired results), he can re-enlist, do his time at the new rank/position, be a good boy and be released without the “disgraceful conduct” attached.
I was also wrong about a couple of points – the insurgent was only minutes away from death, not hours, even if a medi-vac had been called – not enough time.
A Cpl. did give conflicting testimony during the trial – only about what happened after the shooting.
And it appears (not 100% sure) that it was the AFA that made the original complaint about the killing. Seems that it’s up to Allah to save/kill the wounded. Piss poor excuse to leave someone to die alone in the dirt.
I would rejoice in a world where there was no need for the Military or Police, unfortunately this isn’t it.
Good point Hugo.
Sorry about the cold thing. My bad 🙁
Hugo & Tim both make excellent points on a a very complex subject. Thank you both.
go fuck your self frenchie fuck.that is what they tolds us.and they used a german ambush on the french as an example.stupid twit.so again shit bag go fuck yourself.as an infanteer that is what they trained me to do.what were you.some service battalion shit or navy , or in our great airforce shit bag.watch your fucking mouth
you know frenchie i am willing to bet you have no military background do you?
i am also willing to bet that you were a certain person who used to spew status quo tugin the line bullshit.he has not been on for a while but you have the same writing style as him and mysteriously appeared a few weeks after he left?
dr.fever.again you talk shit and i am willing to bet again you have no military experience,because if you had even basic training,you know that is what the training entailed in an ambush scenario?jackass.take your holier then thou appearence and continue your lies with those that surround you and whom you wish to impress.because i see through such acting and posturing for what it is.bullshit.