Did British soldiers abuse Iraqi teenagers in Basra in 2004?

[Hurkyl]

Who cares how much stress they were under, I don't. That does not excuse them from acting like animals. You did not see other soldiers acting like that, and they were in the same place, at the same time, under the same conditions. They should be thrown in jail for 5-10 years.

I agree (with a reservation) -- you can't simply give the soldiers blanket amnesty for their actions under the pretense of unbearable stress.

The reservation is that we can't just assume they should be thrown in jail either. They deserve due process just like any other Brit.

And while unlikely, that might mean that they are let off due to a legitimate stress-related condition. But the point is that it will have been determined by an investigative process, rather than automatically assumed.

 

[ukmicky]

Not the famous colonel bob stewart, its always him. By the way he retired 11 years ago and these days everything he says has to be taken with a pinch of salt. he's into politics now as well as public speaking which he gets paid very well :)for and in general says whatever is necessary to get himself some publicity. As for the video I've seen worse on US reality TV police shows. As for the audio from the video WELLLL it could be real but i bet someones adding a few choice words and sounds after it was shot just to increase it selling potential.

 

[Cyrus]

But the point is that it will have been determined by an investigative process, rather than automatically assumed.

Investigate what, you have seen the beating with your own eyes. They should go to trial, it should be an open and shut case, and they should get 5-10 years in prison, every last one of them.

The reservation is that we can't just assume they should be thrown in jail either.

Why the double standard again? Do you think there was a trial for the 'suspects' sent to GIPMO without trial or reason, and were held as long as the US wants? (I'm making a point here, yes they should have a trial just as the people in GIPMO should.)

As for the audio from the video WELLLL it could be real but i bet someones adding a few choice words and sounds after it was shot just to increase it selling potential.

Until that is ruled by an expert, it is what was said by the camera man.

 

[Burnsys]

I agree (with a reservation) -- you can't simply give the soldiers blanket amnesty for their actions under the pretense of unbearable stress.

The reservation is that we can't just assume they should be thrown in jail either. They deserve due process just like any other Brit.

And while unlikely, that might mean that they are let off due to a legitimate stress-related condition. But the point is that it will have been determined by an investigative process, rather than automatically assumed.

Funny you said "Just like any other brit", becouse Due process is something the US an Brit forces have never gived to the iraki people.

 

[Hurkyl]

Funny you said "Just like any other brit", becouse Due process is something the US an Brit forces have never gived to the iraki people.

Why is it funny? We were talking about a Brit. The only legal systems that could be of relevance would be the British legal system and the Iraqi legal system, and it's clear that it's the British one that is to handle the case.

But, of course, I don't think that's what you wanted to talk about, despite it being what you quoted. Well, would you care to (explicitly) state a point and make an argument? I'm especially keen to see how you argue that the coalition forces are serving as part of Iraq's judicial system.

 

[ukmicky]

Investigate what, you have seen the beating with your own eyes. They should go to trial, it should be an open and shut case, and they should get 5-10 years in prison, every last one of them.

So the fact that the other half of the video has just surfaced showing these troops enduring a sustained attack by mortars, grenades and rocks by a group of people which contained those captured means nothing.

I wonder why the newspaper in question edited the footage removing all that preceded the footage shown to the world and only showed the so called unprovoked attack .Maybe because it gave reason for their apparent loss of cool. i believe this so called unprovoked attack was filmed around the same time that another group of british soldiers where attacked in the same manner, on that occasion the british soldiers were killed. why do people suddenly snap and lose control i wonder.

 

[Cyrus]

So the fact that the other half of the video has just surfaced showing these troops enduring a sustained attack by mortars, grenades and rocks by a group of people which contained those captured means nothing.

Nope, not one bit. They are not the law of the land. They can detain agressors, but they can't beat the hell out of whoever they want whenever they want, especially when they are beating up on kids.

Maybe because it gave reason for their apparent loss of cool.

Again, so what? That does not excuse them from beating those kids.

 

[ukmicky]

Again, so what? That does not excuse them from beating those kids.

Its called aggravating and mitigating factors and its down to a military tribunal to decide whether there are any in this case which could have caused these soldiers to temporally act in the way which they did.
I say temporally because there is no evidence so far that these soldiers have ever acted in this way before or since.
Also we have no idea how serious these so called beatings were, we have no idea what injuries their were to these young men if any. Watching it on the telly proves nothing in respect of how hard or maliciously any of the blows were delivered or if there was any actual intent to harm seriously or not .

We should leave the judgements to the experts, instead of judging people without all the facts, people who have got to do what is at the moment the most demanding and stressful life threatening job in the world.

Innocent until proven guilty.

 

[poststruct]

Nope, not one bit. They are not the law of the land. They can detain agressors, but they can't beat the hell out of whoever they want whenever they want, especially when they are beating up on kids.

Again, so what? That does not excuse them from beating those kids.

If your condemnation applies to all those who beat up suspects, then I could understand your concerns. But I don't see you condemning the Islamists when they beat up the seculars in Basra, and which has been reported over and over again. Or when the thugs plant bombs on the British troops, who are mandated by the UN to preserve the peace in Basra.

If the concern is to uphold the rule of law and justice, then the largest violator of the law is Sadr and his Islamic thugs in Basra who have killed, tortured and maimed countless number of people. Applying outrage selectively, just demonstrates that your outrage is not directed at the injustices, but rather directed at one of the sides.

 

[Cyrus]

If your condemnation applies to all those who beat up suspects, then I could understand your concerns. But I don't see you condemning the Islamists when they beat up the seculars in Basra, and which has been reported over and over again. Or when the thugs plant bombs on the British troops, who are mandated by the UN to preserve the peace in Basra.

.....because no one was talking about Islamists beating up seculars in Basra, were they?

Perhaps you should stay on topic, as the rest of us in here have. Who cares about Sadr and his Islamic thugs. That is not the issue here. You know, try reading a thread before posting in it.

Applying outrage selectively, just demonstrates that your outrage is not directed at the injustices, but rather directed at one of the sides.

Obviously, you can't pay attention to the topic in here, nor to what I was talking about. Don't come in here and write slander about me. You do that again and I will report you.

 

[poststruct]

So what is your interpretation of the topic of this thread?

That some thugs are throwing rocks, shooting, and perhaps RPGing the lawful authorities in Basra, only to be captured? And those being beaten are obviously adults resisting arrest. This is very clear from the video. And that the British soldier who was threatened with his life a minute ago and who has captured the offender, will then have to release him to the Sadr run police force, so the perpetrator will be immediately released without charge, only to come back and threaten the life of the British soldier again? That the British army in Basra is not executing perfect justice under warlike conditions, where there is no rule of law and the police force is infilitrated by the Islamist goons?

Or is the topic about one sided anti-democratic selective outrage propaganda meted out by some individuals who masquerade that as a fight for justice and rule of law?

The topic as fars as I am concerned has already been set out on post #2 in this thread:

Law of Truly Large Numbers

What was the point of this? Someone alledgedly did something wrong, and they're being investigated. Why is it worth starting a thread about it?

 

[Cyrus]

So what is your interpretation of the topic of this thread?

We are discussing the issues of what the british soldiers did in this video, as the title of the thread explicitly states.

And that the British soldier who was threatened with his life a minute ago and who has captured the offender, will then have to release him to the Sadr run police force, so the perpetrator will be immediately released without charge, only to come back and threaten the life of the British soldier again?

So how exactly does that excuse his actions?

Or is the topic about one sided anti-democratic selective outrage propaganda meted out by some individuals who masquerade that as a fight for justice and rule of law?

What did I tell you about posting slander. You are going to get a warning for that my friend. I have no more patience to put up with people accusing me for words that THEY put in MY mouth. You keep putting words in my mouth like that and you won't be here much longer.

 

[poststruct]

We are discussing the issues of what the british soldiers did in this video, as the title of the thread explicitly states.

I am sorry, but you have gotten the topic wrong. Somebody posted mud propaganda, and didnt explain why. The #2 poster set the tone for this thread by pointing out the meta-message inherent in the video.

So how exactly does that excuse his actions?

Now this is the better of your questions. However, there is nothing ingenious about demanding perfect justice under warlike conditions. You have to look at this action in the larger context. Once that violent stone throwing gun wielding protester, which by any standard would be summarily sentenced to a year behind bars, leaves the gates of the compound, he is scott-free and there will be no charges. We both know that there is not much of a rule of law in Basra, and there is even less of a process of justice. The police force is essentially in the hands of Sadr and Fadhila. They have been beating up seculars, assassinating reporters, intimidating dissenters, and silencing oponents. They have been encouraging these stonethrowers and gun runners to attack the British troops.

Under these conditions, to complain about lack of perfect justice, is akin to complaining that your scotch does not have enough ice on a sinking Titanic. Yes, I suppose the staff on the Titanic continue to be responsible to deliver adequate ice under all conditions. But anyone observing the complainant will have to question their sincerety.

The British troop was acting in a manner that was in accordance with prevailing practice or common law in Basra. If the Islamists want to complain about that, then maybe they should first hold up the rule of law themselves, act in a civil manner, and stop assassinating journalists and beating up seculars. So yes in a bizarre and remote context, where for example if the British troops were faced with a non-violent protest under civil conditions, then I could see your complaint to be somewhat valid. But under the prevailing cultural and legal conditions of Basra, to demand perfect justice, where the British are totally understaffed and outnumbered, is rather disingenious.

What did I tell you about posting slander. You are going to get a warning for that my friend. I have no more patience to put up with people accusing me for words that THEY put in MY mouth. You keep putting words in my mouth like that and you won't be here much longer.

Note: I do not need friends like you. Your attempt to bully me and silence me into submission is hilarious. You sound like those Mohammedans who jump up and down everytime somebody brings up a fact about Prophet Mohammad, such as him holding slaves. Dont worry, you can't intimidate me and I suggest that you act civilly around here and allow people to voice their opinion. I have the right to voice my opinion about your message and method. That is exactly what I am doing when questioning an insincere post. If you find that to be slander, then boy, you aint know nothin 'bout the law or about civil discourse.

In fact, I should be the one putting in a complaint about you on your attempts to silence people from voicing their opinion about insincerety on this forum. Now you go jump up and down, and try to excuse the so-called "infalliable" Prophet and his stable of slaves, and try to silence me my dear sir.

 

[Cyrus]

Go rant some where else. If you want to make an argument, then present one in a descent fashion. You came in here and blasted away at me making wild acusations of things I never said. I am not going to defend myself against someone who continues to put words in my mouth. You are all over the map with your argument. Are you talking about the troops, the cartoon, me 'trying to slience you', the Islamics beating each other? Pick one topic, (i.e the topic of this thread), and stick to it. From this point forth I will no longer dignify your posts with an answer.

Consider yourself reported.

 

[loseyourname]

Don't restart this thread. I'll go through and delete the bad posts and then reopen it later, or maybe someone else will.