Soldier rally for jailed marine?
 

Military chiefs ban serving personnel from mass rally in support of Alex Blackman | Daily Mail Online
You never have been allowed to demonstrate or go to a rally of this sort.
Not sure if the Mail has got knickers in a twist as usual or if the "Soldiers" are ignorant of the rules?
What next a military union?
Personally would not stop me if I felt strongly enough about it though.

I've read two articles in the Mail of which I had personal knowledge - both were a pack of lies. Pretty much sums up all journalism in the UK, although some papers do take it to the extreme and the Mail has always seemed to be right up there with the worst.

I don't really have a problem with it to be honest. As someone once said...

"You get the politicians you vote for, and the newspapers you buy".

Quite why anyone would buy and read the Daily Mail in this era, is frankly beyond my ken.

I would be there if I could.

I have huge sympathy for this NCO and think he has been very badly treated by the corps he served loyally. I do not condone his actions, but nor do I condone the actions of a woman suffering from post natal depression who kills her child. The law recognises her condition, hence the offence of infanticide, which is treated differently from murder and often attracts a non-custodial sentence. Sgt Blackman was in an analogous position, and should never been tried for the crime of murder which carries a mandatory life sentence, but manslaughter, for which he could have pleaded guilty on the grounds of diminished responsibility

That said, I understand that anyone still serving should not get involved in this protest, but I also hope that groups like "Britain First" etc do not try and hijack it in order to publicise their own racist views.

Bit late for that TTN, I've seen plenty of Failbook posts claiming to come from such right wing groups using this issue as evidence of failure by the government to protect our troops.

Spot on, TTN.

Am I missing something here?

Taking an overt political stance has always been forbidden/discouraged for active members of the armed forces. However, in recent times the armed forces have been 'encouraged' and permitted to become involved in activities which might be seen to fall in to this category.

There seems to me to be more than a tad of double standards here!

Old Duffer

Im pretty sure they would be allowed.....nay, encouraged to attend a Gay pride demo.

Yeah. They got their Yuman Rites, innit?

I rarely post... However!

No matter what way you look at what happened with this Marine, he walked up to an injured fighter and shot him. Prior to doing this he asked if the helmet cam was switched off (because he knew what he was about to do was wrong), then stated he was about to breach the geneva convention and finally muttered some Shakespeare before killing the wounded enemy fighter! After the deed was carried out he then tells his section that it didn't happen.

I am no head doctor, but that does not sound like a man on the edge who had PTSD or "diminished responsibility". He killed someone in cold blood and made a conscious effort to do this despite several comments that demonstrated he knew the legality, morality and gravity of his actions and subsequent attempts to cover it up.

That being said, I do believe there are extenuating circumstances such as being battle weary, under-manned, numerous contacts and his friends injured. None of these can justify the killing. He was a SNCO who has a duty under service and international law, namely the Law of Armed Conflict, to provide medical assistance to injured enemy combatants.

This is not something new and I am 100% confident he would have been taught this on several occasions.

Well I for one support this soldier! I don't give a monkeys stuff for the legal wranglings of this case! This guy did his job! Would the Taliban fighter have survived? I very much doubt it from the reports read out at the CM! This is not a fluffy political debate! The guys were fighting for their lives and war is tough!:mad:

Agreed! This otherwise "good son of England", made an error of judgement. I'm pretty sure it could only happen in this country.....the self righteous and sanctimonious politicians that take us in to these crazy campaigns are morally bankrupt! Get our boys and girls to do their dirty work....then throw 'em under a bus!! Those who convicted this guy should hang their heads in shame. I'm so glad my son saw the light and left the army....we're a disgrace!:ugh:
MD

Is there a political element to protesting about a perceived injustice?

Strongly agree with Heights Good.

I am surprised by the hyperbole around what is quite a clear case (he was filmed in the act, and admitting to a breach of the Geneva Convention).

Sgt Blackman is not God, or a doctor - whether or not the guy would have survived, it wasnt his call to make, a point he was clearly aware of during the act.

Plenty of guys had a hard tour, and many have stress related issues - but they operated under the bounds of international law. That's why the British Forces are respected the world over, and aren't in a peer group with Nigeria.

And another in strong agreement with Height's Good.

This is a passage from a book about the Falklands War by an ex-Para (Tony Banks).

A terrified young soldier stood up with his hands in the air jabbering away in Spanish and obviously wanting to surrender. He looked like a teenager — a boy, much like ourselves.
He was pleading for his life. We looked at each other and hesitated. A brief argument broke out between us. Somebody shouted at us to follow orders: ‘Shoot him.’ Out of the darkness, another voice replied, ‘No, you shoot him.’
As the argument went on, the boy crumpled to his knees. Finally, somebody threw a tarpaulin over him, shot him, and finished him off with a bayonet. That was it. We moved on.

I suggest that if the Para who did that had been prosecuted, then Sgt Blackman might not be in jail today. Blackman's sentence will be a strong deterrent to any other British soldiers who kill an unarmed (and injured) prisoner.

I bet plenty of other events went unreported and many more were not actioned even though they were known about! Why was this guy singled out for severe punishment? He is a soldier and they are all trained to kill! Fact. Why should anyone be surprised when in the heat of an engagement they actually kill the innocent either deliberately or by mistake?


Standing by for incoming fluffy rabbits and politically correct nonsense!!

OK, just for you, newt:


However, I agree with you entirely!

you're quite right.......but I can't imagine what was going through his mind.....what he'd seen and been through! The politicians treat members of the armed forces with contempt.......and at the same time expecting them to clear up the mess they've created. They come home damaged physically and mentally........and get more contempt heaped upon them from every direction. It may not have been AB's finest hour but I for one think there were extenuating circumstances.

Like I said.....I'm so glad my son got out! I'm not a pacifist.....far from it.......I'm just fiercely proud of our armed forces, who are asked to do a difficult job with one arm tied behind their backs.

Apologies for the rant.....time for a coffee!
MD :ok:

Untrue - soldiers are trained to operate within Rules of Engagement. Killing is often a necessary part of the ROE, when justified, which this, legally, wasn't.

minigun


There is a famous saying about walking a mile in someone's shoes.....


Unless you have, then get off your sanctimonious horse.:=