US Launches Airstrikes in Somalia

[Lazer-Hound]

Originally Posted by Mr-AEO

I am slightly troubled by this approach.



I think that we could save a whole lot of money in court fees in this country if we adopted this approach in the UK and sentenced all people 'suspected' of a crime immediately. This would do away with the need for a tiresome and silly trial. The fuzz has caught them so obviously they are guilty....

but don't we operate within the law? this is why we can hold our heads up in the world and say "We are considerably better than thou" to Tommy Taliban.

I'm not clear why/if International Law allows us to kill suspects without trial, even when they are not shooting us, or about to shoot us (aka ROE).

So maybe this is just another example of 'illegal military action'.

Well I'm sure you'll volunteer to serve a warrant on the suspects in their Somali encampments requiring them to present themselves at Bow Street Magistrates the following week so they can have a 'fair trial'

[SASless]

For you Spam bashers out there....tell me what the difference between the AC-130 strike in Somalia and the SAS hits in Gib is? The IRA bombing suspects were killed by the SAS without any consideration of an arrest and trial.

Were not those Irish Terrorists entitled to a fair trial?

You do recall of course that the Aideed fellow (assuming he was the son of the Aideed targetted by the US in '93.....is that man's son who served in the US Marine Corps.)

[BenThere]

I find it interesting that the people with bad things to say about this skirmish are a senior official with the EU, and Zawahiri and al-Qaeda.

I'd like to see a little more of the burden for avoiding collateral death placed on the beligerants who operate and hide among civilians, using our desire and obligation to avoid collateral death as an effective weapon against us.

[Mr-AEO]

LazerHound. Quite blatantly, in some circumstances, it is impossible to do such things. In which case, I would have thought that you would have to get cover from either your ROE, because you are at war, or an over-riding mandate from the UN. Otherwise, the hit is effectively 00; as in 007, licence to kill, without recourse to any kind of proof whatsoever. To take this a step further, the US could efectively decapitate anyone they like in the world by first branding them a terrorist suspect. As it is, they lock them up for years without trial in a prison in contravention of the Geneva Convention so I suppose the next step is to kill them, to save on beds/food etc. Does the US play by the rules or not? As I said, we can decend to playing by terrorist rules, but then, imho, we cannot claim to be a force for good - the waters muddy.

As for the IRA in Gib?

1988: 'SAS killed lawfully' - Gibraltar jury
The killing of three unarmed IRA suspects by British soldiers was lawful, a Gibraltar court has found.

The jury took less than seven hours to reach the 9-2 majority verdict on the shootings in March 1988 of Sean Savage, Daniel McCann, and Mairead Farrell. The elite SAS team shot the suspects because they believed the republican dissidents were about to detonate a remote control bomb in the tiny British territory.

There was a jury & court involved, post the event I grant you, but justuce was upheld. Will these Somali 'suspects' be tried in court, ever? Probably not. Because most of them were probably collateral.

[ORAC]

To take this a step further, the US could efectively decapitate anyone they like in the world by first branding them a terrorist suspect.

I think you'll find that's the Russians....

Russia's New Cold War:.....July 9 this year was a seismic date. On that day legislators in the Duma - the Russian state parliament - unanimously approved new laws which allowed Russia's Federal Security Service to hunt down and kill enemies of the state anywhere on the face of the Earth....

[handysnaks]

Sasless.

I'm not a spam basher, and if the Somalia operation has worked then great. However, to compare it with the Gibraltar killings? Anyway, to answer your question

For you Spam bashers out there....tell me what the difference between the AC-130 strike in Somalia and the SAS hits in Gib is? The IRA bombing suspects were killed by the SAS without any consideration of an arrest and trial.

AC 130 armament
two M61 20mm Vulcan cannons
with 3,000 rounds
one L60 40mm Bofors cannon
with 256 rounds
one M102 105mm howitzer
with 100 rounds
One 25mm GAU-12 Gatling gun
(1,800 rounds per minute)
one L60 40mm Bofors cannon
(100 shots per minute)
one M102 105mm cannon
(6-10 rounds per minute)

Gibraltar killings
25 rounds (9mm as a guess)

[West Coast]

"There was a jury & court involved, post the event I grant you"
So then you support shoot first and ask questions later I see. No different chap.
"Will these Somali 'suspects' be tried in court, ever? Probably not"
At least as good a chance as the IRA thugs had before the trigger was pulled. Not usre, will look it up when I get home but I believe some were tried in absentia. If true, then if they are among the dead, they received at least as fair a trail as the IRA boys in Gib.
"As it is, they lock them up for years without trial in a prison"
You talking about gitmo or a certain prision that housed IRA terrorists?
"Probably not. Because most of them were probably collateral"
The op isn't complete, how do you feel using what little info is out there you can make an informed conclusion? Credibilty at stake.
Trying to stake the moral high ground must be tough when the surface is made of swiss cheese.

[West Coast]

Snaks

The operation is the same, simply the weapons used differ.