UK Royal Marine charged with murder for killing Taliban insurgent

Please do not devalue the word atrocity Pol Pot massacres, Nazi gas chambers, Vietnam napalm they were atrocities for goodness sake. This was just a hot pissed off guy shooting vermin that would have/should have died anyway.
And by the way, for all those others that have chipped in here burning with (self) righteous indignation - these Marines are not invaders in this case. They are not just randomly killing Afghanistan citizens who are just going about their business. I am not going defend the western presence there for a minute - I totally believe that we should not be there - but thats another conversation.
So nor are the taliban defending any kind of Afghani principles or its citizens or its borders. They are on their own fucked up agenda which involves persecuting Afghani people.
Some people that think this insurgent had some kind of human rights violated? Fuck right off. Taliban pretty much gave up their human rights when they started behaving like insane savages, beheading people and shooting little girls in the face.
Its okay to realise that and its okay to condemn them, just like we condemned Nazis. Whats the difference? They both have twisted insane ideas. This difference is...
Oh yeah...
THESE bad guys are Muslims, so we must not criticize them or we might look like Islamphobes, or xenophobes or something, and that would be...bad or something.
Bollocks to that.
Taliban relationship with Islam seems to be a lot like the KKK relationship with Christianity.
So, insane fuckwits. But more dangerous, at least you know what crusty inbred backwater of the deep south the KKK usually hang out in.

 

Tell me, jenner, why do believe we shouldn't be in Afghanistan?

By the way, nice diatribe!

 

I am really, really interested in hearing why you believe we shouldn't be in Afghanistan. I'm wondering if you're thinking that, since Bin laden denied committing the crime of 9/11, and there is no evidence to prove that he did it, we had no justification for invading. Or, maybe when the Afghan government asked for evidence of his guilt before agreeing to hand him over, and the U.S. denied them their request and simply attacked, it caused you to believe that we shouldn't be there.

 

First the pipeline
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Afghanistan_Pipeline
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan_Oil_Pipeline

The new deal on the pipeline was signed on 27 December 2002 by the leaders of Turkmenistan, Afghanistan and Pakistan.[10] In 2005, the Asian Development Bank submitted the final version of a feasibility study designed by British company Penspen. The project has drawn strong US support as it would allow the Central Asian republics to export energy to Western markets "without relying on Russian routes"

You should also know that in 1997 the Enron Corporation gave the Taliban millions of dollars in a winner take all attempt to strike a deal for the energy pipeline in Afghanistan. Their relationship continued despite that Al Qaeda bombed two American embassies in Africa in 1998.

Second the Afghanistan government is only a puppet regime:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...overnment-crumbling-eyes-We-talk-Taliban.html

Hopefully you catch the part in the article that says

Now perhaps you'll see a different picture ? Or at least stop dancing with the 14 year olds keyboard soldiers living in their parent's basements that talk about Warrior Codes. (In my humble opinion there are far too many gamers in the world today)

 

The killing of any man is an atrocity cass_jenner. These people are not vermin, the fact that you would even say that is sad to see. Every human being should be valued regardless of their personal beliefs or ideals. This sort of talk is the same thing that fuels the horrid fires of racism, anti-semitism, and bigotry all throughout the world. Do you really want to be a part of that?

 

Really? Why? Just because?
Look, if you really believe that then good luck to you, but I'm not buying it. I know the wrong and horrors that some human beings bring about and I really do not believe that they should be "valued"

 

Yes I do

Because to say that any one person is more valuable or special than any other denies the very existance of a human soul. We may not be valuable in exactly the same way but we are all valuable equally.

Because no one man or woman is any more important, etc, etc, etc.

The problem is that people don't believe this, and that is why murder and rape, torture and hate, are so common in our world. That and the obvious reasons of human emotion meets human inconsistancy.

On the other side of things you are right, we are not all special in our own way. We are all special because of what we are........

 

They have value, Some had high price tag's on them, Millions of $$. Other than that, They are target practice for what their 'brothers' did on 9/11 and what they follow to this day.

I didn't see anyone mention that these 'harmless' muslim/terrorist's had the US, UN and other base's and out posts marked for fire wrote down in their Koran. They used their little pocket book thats full of shit as enemy maps/locations of interest.

But if shoe was on other foot, It would be a big mess. That's why the Geneva convention only applies to the USA and now UK soldiers and is flat out bullshit that its there to begin with.

Fighting on another's terms, Is how you loose.

 

We invaded their country. When they fight back, you decide that they have no value. In your own words, why are we in Afghanistan?

 

Abdul Mustafa

I'm still asking where this hub/pipeline is...?
It doesn't seem to have materialised.

So, what you are saying is:
The U.S and it's allies spent billions (perhaps trillions) of dollars on a war so they could have control of a proposed pipeline running through Afghanistan, and that they installed a 'puppet government' in Afghanistan to facilitate this?

Obviously allowing 'elections' and any Afghan PM to claim that his masters are invaders, and they are not doing anything of significance for 'his' country?

So far so good?

Have 'we' also installed 'puppet governments' in Turkmenistan, Pakistan and India?

I knew about the proposed Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline.
I hadn't caught up with it recently, though.
So, it's still not there, and might be there when combat troops are no longer there (2017)?

Context:

The bombings are widely believed to have been revenge for American involvement in the extradition, and alleged torture, of four members of Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ) who had been arrested in Albania in the two months prior to the attacks. Between June and July, Ahmad Isma'il 'Uthman Saleh, Ahmad Ibrahim al-Sayyid al-Naggar, Shawqi Salama Mustafa Atiya and Mohamed Hassan Tita were all renditioned from Albania to Egypt, with the cooperation of the United States; the four men were accused of participating in the assassination of Rifaat el-Mahgoub, as well as a later plot against the Khan el-Khalili market in Cairo. The following month, a communique was issued warning the United States that a "response" was being prepared to repay them for their interference.

According to journalist Lawrence Wright, the Nairobi operation was named after the Holy Kaaba in Mecca; the Dar es Salaam bombing was called Operation al-Aqsa in Jerusalem, but "neither had an obvious connection to the American embassies in Africa. Bin Laden initially said that the sites had been targeted because of the 'invasion' of Somalia; then he described an American plan to partition Sudan, which he said was hatched in the embassy in Nairobi. He also told his followers that the genocide in Rwanda had been planned inside the two American embassies."
Wright concludes that bin Laden's actual goal was "to lure the United States into Afghanistan, which had long been called 'The Graveyard of Empires.'" According to a 1998 memo authored by Mohammed Atef and seized by the FBI, around the time of the attacks, al-Qaeda had both an interest in and specific knowledge of negotiations between the Taliban and the American-led gas pipeline consortium CentGas...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1998_United_States_embassy_bombings


You should also know that in 1997 the Enron Corporation gave the Taliban millions of dollars in a winner take all attempt to strike a deal for the energy pipeline in Afghanistan.

In what way, till when?


Hopefully you catch the part in the article that says

Too weak, unpopular and corrupt to provide security or development, he has been forced to turn on his puppeteers in order to retain even a vestige of legitimacy in the eyes of his people.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...pet-government-crumbling-eyes-We-talk-Taliban

Context:

Read more: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jun/26/nato-taliban-india-pakistan

So, it's just about the US getting it's hands on gas pipes?

I wish it was a simple as that...

I don't think you really knew what I thought in the first place.

 

You're right, Odon, it's not as simple as a pipe line.

The US Administration’s acknowledgment that it first took cognizance of Afghanistan’s vast mineral wealth following the release of the USGS 2007 report is an obvious red herring. Afghanistan’s mineral wealth and energy resources (including natural gas) were known to both America’s business elites and the US government prior to the Soviet-Afghan war (1979-1988).

Geological surveys conducted by the Soviet Union in the 1970s and early 1980s confirm the existence of vast reserves of copper (among the largest in Eurasia), iron, high grade chrome ore, uranium, beryl, barite, lead, zinc, fluorspar, bauxite, lithium, tantalum, emeralds, gold and silver.(Afghanistan, Mining Annual Review, The Mining Journal, June, 1984). These surveys suggest that the actual value of these reserves could indeed be substantially larger than the one trillion dollars “estimate” intimated by the Pentagon-USCG-USAID study.

___________________________________


http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-wa...st-reserves-of-minerals-and-natural-gas/19769

 

storch

So, they knew Afghanistan was rich with minerals and energy resources - so invaded, and now the US government, it's allies and 'America’s business elites' are in control of these resources (and land where it resides)?

 

No, the U.S. would never invade a country to get control of its resources.

 

What was your last post all about then?

That the US have noted how the Afghan people, and the country as a whole, can benefit from the rich resources underneath their feet - safe in the knowledge they are in full control, and can sell to whomever they wish and allow whomever they wish to manage/'exploit' those resources (such as shell managing an oil field etc)?

 

My comment was sacrastic.

Why don't you make a point about what you think about what you've read. If you really find something that you disagree with, just say what it is, and we'll discuss it.

 

Setting the politics aside, I think this is an issue that's more about human weakness.

Marine A's actions show a breakdown of military discipline in my opinion. He knew what he was doing was against the Geneva convention, but did it anyway. Which is obviously against orders for Marines in the field.

On the other hand I can understand to some extent the feelings that probably provoked this summary execution. Must be very hard to see you friends getting killed or blown to bits and not feel anger, even a desire for revenge.
Also, witnessing bloodshed may have a kind of hardening effect on some people.

Anyway, he go to jail, do his time.

I wonder how many such executions there have been during the Afgan War?

 

Far more than people want to know. Same was true in Iraq, and probably every war since the beginning of time.

 

Before the war Afghanistan was the 10 poorest nation on earth. It was a nation constantly fighting with warlords and completly depended upon logistics support from foreign powers that included Russia, Pakistan, India, Iran, China, France, Canada and the United States.

One of the poorest nations in the world was indescriminatly carpet bombed by the richest (United States) and the 4th richest (England). The people of Aghanistan were never a threat to anyone.

So yes the United States and its friends are there to rob the nation of its minerals and poppy fields.

 

I agree. So I think that helps put this case into perspective a bit more clearly.

Myself, I think he should go to jail, mainly because that sets an example and helps uphold military discipline, but receive a fairly lenient sentence.

Seems wrong to me to train a man to fight, put a gun in his hand in a theatre of war, and then make him a kind of scapegoat for moral outrage when he goes a bit too far.
But that's war. A dirty business it can be.

 

The people weren't a threat. I agree. But terror training camps were I think.

I think too that it's a long time since the UK was 4th richest nation. 23rd richest now.



http://www.gfmag.com/component/cont...hest-and-poorest-countries.html#axzz2kSo2KOLg