Marine A - Right or wrong?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted Member 1156
  • Start date Start date
Liverpoolphil said:
The government and MOD havent backed or protected the Forces for years - more than happy to wash their hands of any dirty laundry and leave someone to fend for themselves - it's the reasons why charities like H4H and Combat Stress centres were started because the government did nothing about PTSD.

As for it being a fluke that it came out ? What difference does that make ?

Yes the world is a better place without a terrorist and he was out to kill but that doesn't make what happened right
Click to expand...
Are you aware how it came to light?

One less terrorist makes it OK to me, if it is acceptable for friends or family of known terrorists to be killed and taken as collateral damage during precision strikes on cars or homes then I can live with Sgt Blackmans actions.
 
pauldj42 said:
Are you aware how it came to light?

One less terrorist makes it OK to me, if it is acceptable for friends or family of known terrorists to be killed and taken as collateral damage during precision strikes on cars or homes then I can live with Sgt Blackmans actions.
Click to expand...

The police found footage on laptop of colleague - how it was found doesn't matter Paul
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Liverpoolphil said:
The police found footage on his laptop - how it was found doesn't matter Paul
Click to expand...
Sort of, a Marine sold his laptop, the buyer put it in for repair and the shop found the footage and called the police.
My point is, all the questions about why they moved him away from the surveillance camera or what had happened on the ground, nobody at the time gave a sh1t, and 2 years later he is hung out to dry.
It's OK saying we have to take the morale high ground, but this has caused us more harm than good, it should've been dealt with internally, by going public it's put more lives at risk.
 
pauldj42 said:
Sort of, a Marine sold his laptop, the buyer put it in for repair and the shop found the footage and called the police.
My point is, all the questions about why they moved him away from the surveillance camera or what had happened on the ground, nobody at the time gave a sh1t, and 2 years later he is hung out to dry.
It's OK saying we have to take the morale high ground, but this has caused us more harm than good, it should've been dealt with internally, by going public it's put more lives at risk.
Click to expand...

Did anybody know what happened beyond the people on the ground ? Was it hidden away to ensure that no one was prosecuted because they knew exactly what they did was wrong ? How it was found , how long it took etc is irrelevant and is attempting to take focus away from the actions of the Marine.

None of what you are saying changes his actions Paul ? And how has it put more lives at risk ? It's not right to hide it all away behind closed doors.

Paul you keep searching for justification - it's not there. If it was a justified killing he wouldn't have been found guilty
 
Liverpoolphil said:
Did anybody know what happened beyond the people on the ground ? Was it hidden away to ensure that no one was prosecuted because they knew exactly what they did was wrong ? How it was found , how long it took etc is irrelevant and is attempting to take focus away from the actions of the Marine.

None of what you are saying changes his actions Paul ? And how has it put more lives at risk ? It's not right to hide it all away behind closed doors.

Paul you keep searching for justification - it's not there. If it was a justified killing he wouldn't have been found guilty
Click to expand...

Sorry Phil, you're wrong, I'm not looking for any justification, to me he is a hero who did nothing wrong and has been treated disgracefully.

You are the one who brought up the moving the bloke away from the surveillance balloon, hence me asking if anyone at the time saw an issue.

I never saw close combat, very close to a couple of bomb blasts and 1 or 2 close calls, even the laundry went further forward than me😃 but 7 years as a Welfare Officer dealing with families of dead and injured serviceman and 10 years as an RBL Caseworker has certainly impacted on how I see things.
 
pauldj42 said:
I had incorrectly believed his defence had been the humane shooting until I took the time to read the link you posted and all the information on that site.

That site also clearly goes into his defence and the lack of support and backing the MOD gave him, was over 2 years for the incident to come to light and even then it was through fluke.

Like I have previously posted, Military personnel should not have immunity to behave how they like, but on a battlefield against a known enemy our soldiers need the protection.

Maybe other forumers may disagree but to me he wasn't just some bloke caught in a fire fight who had rights, he was a member of the Taliban who had gone out that day to kill British and allied soldiers and for that he has no sympathy from me and Sgt Blackman, for whatever reason, did the world a favour.
Click to expand...

Paul, I 100% agree with your thoughts and sentiment BUT it doesn't give Sgt Blackman the right to become executioner. He made a grave error of judgement.
 
Val said:
Paul, I 100% agree with your thoughts and sentiment BUT it doesn't give Sgt Blackman the right to become executioner. He made a grave error of judgement.
Click to expand...
Fair point Val, but for me the only thing he could be guilty of, is the grave error of judgement, not murder.
 
pauldj42 said:
Fair point Val, but for me the only thing he could be guilty of, is the grave error of judgement, not murder.
Click to expand...

Grave error for sure but bottom line is he shot an unarmed injured man, he really does deserve the punishment. What the punishment maybe is the debate. I don't believe the man is anything other than a hero but this episode has really soured his name and career.
 
One Planer said:
Is Paul allowed a personal opinion?
Click to expand...

Yes!

But if that clashes with the Army'd official position, he should consider either whether he should be a member. Or, if retired, whether he should continue to receive any payment (pension or otherwise) from it!

The link LPP provides shows a clear breach of all sorts of Army regs! I have great sympathy for those putting their lives on the line to protect innocent civilians (and UK's interests) in a weird conflict zone! I believe the punishment was rather harsh - and an appeal based on PTSD should be considered sympathetically! Remember that a huge number of PTSD sufferers were actually 'shot at dawn' only a century (2 'proper' wars) ago!
 
Foxholer said:
Yes!

But if that clashes with the Army'd official position, he should consider either whether he should be a member. Or, if retired, whether he should continue to receive any payment (pension or otherwise) from it!
Click to expand...

The days of blindly following orders regardless of what they are finished a long time a go, it failed in WW1 and it didn't work as a defence for the SS at the end of WW2.

We are allowed to think and have opinions.
 
pauldj42 said:
Really? Read the posts, he said I was looking for justification for Sgt Blackman's actions, I assured him I'm not, how is that hypocritical?
Click to expand...

You 'fixed' my post as opinion (and yes, it was - but, I believe, also factual! But declare your (opinion) post to be fact! The words 'To me' clearly indicate 'opinion'!
 
Last edited:
Foxholer said:
You 'fixed' my post as opinion, but declare your (opinion) post to be fact!
Click to expand...
Because you answered with one word and no justification, if you'd of explained yourself so people can understand what you mean then we can agree/disagree/debate/comment, therefore in the absence of any back up to that one word we are left in no-mans land.
 
pauldj42 said:
Because you answered with one word and no justification, if you'd of explained yourself so people can understand what you mean then we can agree/disagree/debate/comment, therefore in the absence of any back up to that one word we are left in no-mans land.
Click to expand...

No! You were simply wrong! No further justification was needed!

Read the ruling of the court and you will see a better explanation than I could give, by a General, so someone you would obey if he gave you an order!

The punishment may be arguable - I believe it could well warrant further examination - but the ruling is quite clear!
 
Foxholer said:
No! You were simply wrong! No further justification was needed!

Read the ruling of the court and you will see a better explanation than I could give, by a General, so someone you would obey if he gave you an order!

The punishment may be arguable - I believe it could well warrant further examination - but the ruling is quite clear!
Click to expand...
So if you'd of given that reason initially then i wouldn't of guessed you were providing no more than an opinion of your own.
really wouldn't be much of a forum if we all gave one word answers and had to guess what a poster meant by it.

As for obeying orders blindly, we don't and are not trained to, there is such a thing as an illegal order, we are not robots!

And the Judge Advocate General is civilian, not a Military General.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
pauldj42 said:
So if you'd of given that reason initially then i wouldn't of guessed you were providing no more than an opinion of your own.
really wouldn't be much of a forum if we all gave one word answers and had to guess what a poster meant by it.

As for obeying orders blindly, we don't and are not trained to, there is such a thing as an illegal order, we are not robots!

And the Judge Advocate General is civilian, not a Military General.
Click to expand...

Read the ruling! You were simply wrong!

Man up and admit it!

You may not like it, but far superior folk to you and me have determined those are the facts!

Mitigation is a separate issue! Though the initial court didn't allow much of that - but that's often the military way!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top