Royal Marine to be sentenced for murder of Taliban
ROS sends us a link to a Guardian story about a Royal Marine who was sentenced for the murder of an injured Taliban member. Actually, the story is about what the Guardian considers a victory of sorts because they convinced the judge to release the Marine’s name. Anyway,the story goes like this;
His court martial in Bulford, Wiltshire, was shown a damning video of him firing his pistol into the chest of the prisoner, who had been badly wounded in a helicopter strike. He was heard telling the dying man: “There you are, shuffle off this mortal coil, you cunt. It’s nothing you wouldn’t do to us.”
The lifting of the anonymity order means that the full details of Blackman’s career can be revealed for the first time.
[…]
By then [his second tour of Afghanistan, following a tour to Iraq] a sergeant, he was considered a safe pair of hands by his superiors, a physically imposing marine who led from the front.
In May 2011, […] was devastated when a roadside bomb claimed the lives of two hugely well-liked and admired marines, including Lieutenant Ollie Augustin, 23, whom Blackman had mentored. “We had a good rapport,” Blackman said. “He was developing into a very good officer.”
Another man lost a leg in the attack. […] and his comrades were outraged to see it hung from a tree as a gruesome trophy. “It’s not a nice thing when you find out body parts have been displayed as a kind of trophy for the world to see,” said […].
I edited out his name, because he has a wife and children who the government claims that they’ve taken steps to protect. I don’t believe it. They also claim that they’ve taken steps to protect him if he’s sent to prison. I don’t believe that either. Now that the media has declared their right to endanger his life and the lives of his family, I hope the media and the judge are willing to accept their culpability should anything happen to any of the family.
Category: Terror War
Shooting a prisoner is no one’s idea of good practice. In this instance, in this war, one could argue that it was not murder but soldier-assisted suicide. That’s what the Taliwackers want, isn’t it, to be martyred?
Every time I see something like this, it pisses me off an inch more at the lefties.
I fail to understand why anyone must be expected to be sympathetic and understanding toward someone who wants to kill you and put your head on a pike at the gates to the city.
Somebody please explain to me, in plain English, why it’s okay for the bad guys (AQs and taliban) to do these disgusting things, but the good guys (our side) can’t reciprocate.
Oh, did you all know that the Syrian rebels yesterday blew a hole in the wall of a government building with a truck bomb, then went inside, entered a hospital and started killing patients and doctors?
This happened all the time in the Pacific in WWII and in Vietnam. We couldn’t trust the wounded and many men died trying to help them. They gave no quarter and we asked for none. Thank God many of us aren’t in prison today. No, we didn’t shoot every wounded gook and never did I see anyone shoot someone who surrendered. Of course I’ve never been to Afghanistan, but it’s my understanding the enemy doesn’t generally take prisoners or is kind to our wounded. Only men that served where he did should make the decision on his guilt or innocence. Damn them.
Was the guy shot in uniform? If not, would this not be acceptable behavior under the Geneva Accords?
How is this murder??
Disgusting.
I could really give two shits less what this RM did. In fact, what he said to the dude before he shot him was pretty epic- very ‘Samuel L. Jackson in Pulp Fiction’- probably what he was going for.
I will say this: WHY IS SOMEONE ALWAYS FUCKING FILMING WHEN SHIT LIKE THIS HAPPENS?! Just sayin’.
M
Lose the stoopid camera…nothing like video to make a slam dunk CM conviction.
A pure unadulterated crock of processed bull fodder by a PC inspired court.
I’ll be the contrarian here. Shooting a prisoner is not something I find acceptable.
Understandable, maybe. Acceptable, no.
@7 Hondo,
If we were talking about a prisoner (of war) in the normal sense of the word, I’d agree. However, since these dicks think “giving quarter” means holding a prisoner until they can set up a camera and behead them…
I think I will respectfully disagree with you here.
M
@ #7: I agree with you to a point. It should not be the default position. But, there are many circumstances where it is legal, perhaps ethical, and certainly expedient.
@9 OWB,
Exactly.
I’ll say it again, if I was on the jury, our dear RM would’ve walked just based off what he said to the Talifucker. Totally epic.
Anyways, it would be interesting to find out how close to death’s doorstep the ‘prisoner’ was. If the guy was done for, I could give two more shits less. Besides, isn’t human euthanasia legal in the UK?
M
“He was heard telling the dying man”. Just a question, how did they establish that the Talib was dying? Was he in imminent threat of death? Perhaps he died as a result of his injuries at the moment he was shot? Was an autopsy performed to determine cause of death?
Just curious, as this seems to be another trial/court martial by media.
@11 UpNorth
Article stated he was wounded in a “helicopter attack” – whatever that means. However, he probably had some horrific injury, that even someone with the most rudimentary of medical training could tell he wasn’t going to make it. And I doubt a Sergeant of Royal Marine
@11 UpNorth
Article stated he was wounded in a “helicopter attack” – whatever that means. However, he probably had some horrific injury, that even someone with the most rudimentary of medical training could tell he wasn’t going to make it. And I doubt a Sergeant of Royal Marine Commandos has only “rudimentary” medical training.
M
And Western civilization continues down the road of suicide when it’s guard dogs are punished for biting bad guys.
So it’s okay for those slimeballs to mutilate the bodies of dead US/allied troops and put it on video on the internet, but if our troops do it and someone sees it, it’s not okay?
I’m not debating the stupid video thing. Just the double standard.
Did I tell you guys that I despise this double standard, and those who came up with it, and it increases by a large percentage every time I see these stories?
Chesty Puller once announced the perfect sentence for someone in his command. A chaplain had accepted the surrender of a few Chinese during the Chosin Campaign. He turned them over to a Marine who told the chaplain outright he did not have the time or the inclination to babysit prisoners. The Chaplain ordered the Marine to take custody of the prisoners. As soon as he did so he promptly shot them all on the spot. The Chaplain put the Marine under arrest went raging to Chesty. As soon as the Chaplain left Chesty sentenced the Marine to get a BAR and report to Captain Bob Barrow’s Company, who had just suffered a huge amount of casulties.
This Royal Marine is a hero. Fuck liberals and fuck you all for acting like the bastard talibani didn’t deserve it.
Well, gee, but no thanks, gdfgdf.
How so very insightful, gdfgdf. Please, go on.
M
This is one of those things where I couldn’t do it, but neither, under the circumstances, could I call out someone who did the deed. I sure could call out the scab who supplied sufficient information to prosecute this hero though. It’s one of those events where you just walk away and pretend you never saw it.
“The enemy does it so it should be OK for us to do it” is one of the most infantile positions a person could possibly take.
In any case, the RM’s actions appear to be a direct violation of Convention 1 Article 3, end of story.
While war is not a civilized behavior in and of itself, completely abandoning self control when you’ve been raised to be a better human being is totally unacceptable, and the good Sgt freely admits he lost control.
I’m with Hondo on this one.
Since Article 3 pertains to “armed conflict not of an international character,” how does it apply here, Jacobite?
Sorry, there was supposed to be a 1 in front of that 3.
Article 13.
And the victim in question appears to qualify as a POW since all the evidence I’ve seen points to his being ‘hors de combat’ due to his wounds.
I was locked out for a while, so here is my late response:
From above: His court martial in Bulford, Wiltshire, was shown a damning video of him firing his pistol into the chest of the prisoner, who had been badly wounded in a helicopter strike. He was heard telling the dying man: “There you are, shuffle off this mortal coil, you cunt. It’s nothing you wouldn’t do to us.”
1. Not in my military.
2. Considering the circumstances, perhaps delayed TRIAGE, or not saying anything and allowing fighter to expire would have been a better option.
3. And to film it … why are Warriors filming the worst of war of their own enjoyment?
On releasing the name of individual thereby endangering family:
1. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
2. Adequate protection should not be afforded to family.
In review, allow your severely wounded terrorists to expire on their own rather than film what will be considered a humiliating execution. Don’t film such acts that clearly violate the Rules of Armed Conflict. Leave you personal Hero Cams at home or in your hootch, tent and or berthing container. And finally, adhere to the core values of your service. I am pretty certain we believe we are better because we have such values.
The virture and or characteristic of Courage includes doing what is right although it may not be the popular thing to do!
Gotcha, Jacobite.
I really don’t agree that combatants not members of an organized, however loosely, military can be afforded POW status. But, I also agree that we should act as if we can whenever possible. Better to err on the side of acting more civilized than the enemy.
There are no POWs in a war on terror, there are no innocents and there are no front lines. The enemy is in Iraq, in Afghanistan and in New York and Detroit and other American cities. The enemy has decided he must end our existence as we an affront to his tender religion of peace sensibilities. What is the nature of the malfunction in Western society that refuses to believe this simple fact of this current conflict between civilizations? This GWOT is not about removing the Taliban, it’s not about removing Al Qaeda, it’s about whether or not the west has the ability to prevent a global islamic take over of all civilization. There is no trading of prisoners or cessation of hostility, there is only a time for the enemy to muster forces and plan a different route to our destruction. We have failed to comprehend the lessons of the last 40 years. We now have an enemy who is endlessly patient and endlessly desirous of our death. This enemy will try to destroy a building and when he fails plot for a decade or more to achieve his result. These are not the kind of people who will respond to pleasant dialog, they know only time and death. Killing them all is an ugly business, but it is the business we need to be in unless we are willing to let them kill more of us as time passes. In the contest between islam and the rest of the world islam has shown tremendous staying power with its’ hatred and penchant for violence. It is my opinion we are not killing nearly enough of these f$ckers every day. No one understand this war or has conducted it with any sense of what is needed to finish it. Instead of f@cking around with small teams of special ops troops hunting for individuals we should be fire bombing villages and towns until there are mostly burned out ruins and thousands and thousands of burning stinking bodies rotting in those villages and towns. We should be using hundreds of thousands of… Read more »
A bit extreme, but I cannot argue with your assessment at all, VOV. Sounds a LOT like what I have been saying for about 40 years.
Fight to win or prepare to die. Those are the only options.
Correction: Adequate protection should be afforded to family.
@28 It gives me no pleasure to make that point, but I prefer spending nice lazy summer days with my family in peace. If muslims and islam wish to interfere and make it so my loved ones suffer then I would prefer muslims and islam die and be unable to create any further problems for anyone here who feels as I do.
Islam has demonstrated its endless capacity for hatred and violence, it’s time for that religion and its followers to take the path of the dinosaur to extinction. If we need to assist in that effort we should use an overwhelming level of death and destruction to make that point clear.
VOV, while I certainly understand your position, I don’t think you entirely do.
You believe doing things the way you describe will end ‘the war on terror’. It won’t, and you know why if you think about it hard enough. It’s because we are human, and because we are human we are destined to fight each other one decade or the next for as long as our species exists.
Has the successful conclusion of ANY conflict in the history of mankind resulted in the end of all conflicts? No. Why? Because as apex predators it’s our species nature to fight.
I believe the best we can hope for is for civilized people to exert civilized force to the very best of their ability at all times.
Do I think the war could have been prosecuted in stronger ways? Yes, do I think what you suggest is acceptable? No.
I fear allowing a mostly civilized force (us) to descend to the level of our enemies (them) is to turn back the clock on real civilized progress amongst people as a whole with a hammer drill, and ultimately no one wins. While it eradicates the immediate threat you see (and I don’t actually believe we can do that even if we tried) it simply feeds the monster that resides in others (not just Islamists, all of us), it feeds base instincts instead of shoring up positive ones.
If we did as you suggest, I guarantee neither you nor your family would be “spending nice lazy summer days” doing anything anymore as I’m pretty sure such actions would quickly turn international allies into enemies, and unite most of the world against us.
NO ONE wins that fight, and the jackals of humanity would have a field day picking over the remains.
@ VOV- I agree kill them all. Total war is the only kind of war that yields positive results for us and what is left of our enemy.
Total war? All-out, slam-bam-damn them all stuff?
And what about those who have nothing to do with any of THEM? Who, in fact, are on the outskirts of it?
Do we end up with a warlord civilization in place of what we have now?
We had one war, The Great War, that ended in a redrawn map of Europe and the world, and the discovery of new and deadly weapons and the plague that followed. Then we had another war that ended in the instant destruction of two cities, and was followed by an uneasy peace that lasted for 44 years.
Now we’re right back where we started, with no end in sight. Are we supposed to be as lethal and vicious as those who wish to wipe us out, simply because we exist?
Man, I am torn on this one. I cannot STAND these fucking jihadi’s and the fact that they have no honor. Killing them all is the way to go as far as I am concerned.
Having said that, we HAVE to have a higher standard than these pricks. It cannot be situational ethics when dealing with prisoners. Now having said THAT, none of us were with that RM Sgt and we do not know the full story I do not think. And if the press has any say in it, all we will know is that that Sergeant is a murderer and he should suffer. Because Islam is a religion of peace and all that bullshit.
We have to be better than killing prisoners that are out of the fight. We cannot, as leaders allow our troops to think that we are going to turn a blind eye to offing prisoners once they become non combatants. If we do that, we are going down a rabbit hole that we as a military will not be able to climb out of.