Marine A gets out in 2 weeks

[LondonManc]

People can be as opinionated and as condescending as they like about Sgt Blackman, but put them out there on the front line and they'll soon change their tune. There's nothing to say that the injured Taliban combatant wouldn't provide further danger to life by either their decision to take the wounded person with them or by leaving him there wounded and signalling for help.

The radicalised nut job from last week was fatally wounded and in no way posing a clear and present danger to anybody at the point at which the treatment was attempted.

Nowhere near close enough situations.

[Whorty]

Clearly I'm the only one on here then that thinks cold blooded killing of a defenseless person (whether that person has done wrong is irrelevant) is wrong. Playing judge, jury and executioner is not the right ethical or moral position to take.

If the soldier does have mental health issues then he should be dealt with like any other killer with mental health issues. If he hasn't got mental health issues and he killed the enemy for other reasons, then again he should be dealt with accordingly.

As for what I would have done .... well, I know I would not have executed the defenseless person. I may have walked away, I may have patched him up and walked away, I may have tried to take him prisoner. For sure I could never say as never been in that situation.

[LondonManc]

Clearly I'm the only one on here then that thinks cold blooded killing of a defenseless person (whether that person has done wrong is irrelevant) is wrong. Playing judge, jury and executioner is not the right ethical or moral position to take.

If the soldier does have mental health issues then he should be dealt with like any other killer with mental health issues. If he hasn't got mental health issues and he killed the enemy for other reasons, then again he should be dealt with accordingly.

As for what I would have done .... well, I know I would not have executed the defenseless person. I may have walked away, I may have patched him up and walked away, I may have tried to take him prisoner. For sure I could never say as never been in that situation.

You've just contradicted yourself in the same paragraph, then you wonder why this is a complex situation?

[Chuck]

I know I would not have executed the defenseless person.

It's quite likely that Sgt Blackman would have said the same thing once. It's worth digging out the reports on the conditions these men had been put in. It's certainly an eye-opener and, while not excusing what he did, goes a very long way to explaining his frame of mind when he did what he did.

[Whorty]

You've just contradicted yourself in the same paragraph, then you wonder why this is a complex situation?

How did I contradict myself? I said I'd not have shot him in cold blood. Even without being in that situation I know that. I would like to think I would have tried to save him, or at least made him comfortable, but I can say for 100% certainly I would not have walked up to him, put the gun to his head and pulled the trigger, and then admitted that I know I have broken the Geneva convention.

And yes, I know it's complex which is why I said I was uncomfortable with the decision, but I didn't say how the soldier should be dealt with. He did wrong to pull the trigger, but why he acted that way needs to be understood. Unfortunately being jingoistic in the support of him because he's "one of us" and not "one of them" just galvanises the insurgents and gets them more support, which in turn gets more people killed and the vicious circle continues.

however which way we look at it violence and killing someone shold never be our sought after solution.

[LondonManc]

How did I contradict myself? I said I'd not have shot him in cold blood. Even without being in that situation I know that. I would like to think I would have tried to save him, or at least made him comfortable, but I can say for 100% certainly I would not have walked up to him, put the gun to his head and pulled the trigger, and then admitted that I know I have broken the Geneva convention.

And yes, I know it's complex which is why I said I was uncomfortable with the decision, but I didn't say how the soldier should be dealt with. He did wrong to pull the trigger, but why he acted that way needs to be understood. Unfortunately being jingoistic in the support of him because he's "one of us" and not "one of them" just galvanises the insurgents and gets them more support, which in turn gets more people killed and the vicious circle continues.

however which way we look at it violence and killing someone shold never be our sought after solution.

Look at it another way - if you don't kill the guy, there is a chance that he can signal for help and get you and your team killed.

Gotta love a bit of Jack Nicholson right now.

"Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinburg? I have a greater responsibility than you could possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago, and you curse the Marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know. That Santiago's death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives. You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall. We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to."

[Whorty]

Look at it another way - if you don't kill the guy, there is a chance that he can signal for help and get you and your team killed.

Gotta love a bit of Jack Nicholson right now.

"Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinburg? I have a greater responsibility than you could possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago, and you curse the Marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know. That Santiago's death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives. You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall. We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to."

I'm sure a lot of people over the centuries have used a similar argument .... my actions give you your freedom, therefore you should allow me to do what I want and not question me. Hmmm, again, doesn't sound very moral to me but hey, I sleep under the blanket of freedom so who am I to question those that kill in my name?!?

[Whorty]

Look at it another way - if you don't kill the guy, there is a chance that he can signal for help and get you and your team killed.

Gotta love a bit of Jack Nicholson right now.

"Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinburg? I have a greater responsibility than you could possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago, and you curse the Marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know. That Santiago's death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives. You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall. We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to."

Oh, and forgot to add ... your quote refers to walls that need defending. Well, I get that, I'd defend my home against an intruder too, but I wouldn't kill someone once I have disarmed them - and BTW, yes, I have had that situation when I was burgled and caught the scum, but instead of beating them senseless I disarmed them (well, the one with the knife) and waited for the cops to arrive. Anyway I digress, the soldier wasn't defending me and my freedoms, he was on foreign soil (quite possibly the country of the man killed) and to some seen as the invader.

[vetran]

I'm sure a lot of people over the centuries have used a similar argument .... my actions give you your freedom, therefore you should allow me to do what I want and not question me. Hmmm, again, doesn't sound very moral to me but hey, I sleep under the blanket of freedom so who am I to question those that kill in my name?!?

Have you seen 'a few good men'?

The whole point of it is you understand both sides attitude and are uneasy as to which one you would choose.

In this case he chose, he should be punished as he chose wrong, but he shouldn't be branded a murderer as he was probably not sane at the time. His crime was revelling in it. If he had injected him with an overdose of morphine, stabbed or shot him wishing him well on his way to his inevitable death then I would be very supportive as I can't see another option. Its the fact he was proud he did it that makes it an offence.

[MrMarkyMark]

Oh, and forgot to add ... your quote refers to walls that need defending. Well, I get that, I'd defend my home against an intruder too, but I wouldn't kill someone once I have disarmed them - and BTW, yes, I have had that situation when I was burgled and caught the scum, but instead of beating them senseless I disarmed them (well, the one with the knife) and waited for the cops to arrive. Anyway I digress, the soldier wasn't defending me and my freedoms, he was on foreign soil (quite possibly the country of the man killed) and to some seen as the invader.

Way to go.........









Grass hopper