Marine A - Right or wrong?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted Member 1156
  • Start date Start date
Liverpoolphil said:
Now we are going into different territory there because let's be honest we were in their country so seperating by cause isn't a line we would be entitled to take

For me what makes us better is because we act humanely and within the laws set out - we aren't looking to kill for a cause we are always looking to protect
Click to expand...
Why were we in their country?
Were we there for a cause?
Was it war or not?
 
Bail refused. Not read the reasoning behind that decision yet, but is he a danger to public? Likely to abscond?

Weird.

And we are meant to be proud to serve our country? Glad I'm out👎
 
Robobum said:
Bail refused. Not read the reasoning behind that decision yet, but is he a danger to public? Likely to abscond?

Weird.

And we are meant to be proud to serve our country? Glad I'm out
Click to expand...

if they believe there is some truth to the ptsd then it kinda makes sense. He'd probably be considered a danger.
 
Robobum said:
Bail refused. Not read the reasoning behind that decision yet, but is he a danger to public? Likely to abscond?

Weird.

And we are meant to be proud to serve our country? Glad I'm out👎
Click to expand...

you could read the news for the reasons
 
Fish said:
You didn't do enough front line tours to make that statement, the regiment and position you were in in the RAF for 22 years meant you did token/minimum tours and mainly in much safer areas as you weren't trained well enough to get really dirty, but when people like Marine A and other frontline regiments do tours 10/1 more than you within the same period I think you'll find that the 99% you state is nowhere near realistic, it wasn't 99% in the 4 full tours of NI I did during some of the worst troubles, it wasn't in the Falklands, Bosnia, Iraq and many more, some my government wouldn't even admit to sending me/us, so please, lets not read from the book in some ideological fantasy just because you did 22 years, of what I would think was mainly behind a desk!



Not much.....even our light infantry regiments/battalions do much more than the RAF on the ground and even that is somewhat protected to the areas they are deployed for their own safety, even the cooks have to go out on tour, they've done 22 years also and have to do so much time on the ground to warrant their tour medal, but obviously nothing like the guys they feed, so in the grand scheme of things, the term of service means squat!
Click to expand...

100% agree
 
Fish said:
This statement though say's otherwise, it gives the impression to those not knowing the roles of RAF personnel who were mainly in administration or training/computer roles that they played just as much an equal role and did as many tours in hot spots than those in other regiments like Marine A, which in simple terms is, utter garbage!

Now if you were in the RAF Regiment now that would be different, but I know you weren't just by looking at you and the opinions you give, I've met some of them and they were proper soldiers, akin to the Para's & Marine's.

A cook could come on here and make the same unqualified statement and attempt to back it up by stating they've done 22 years, that's no different to you IMO.

I'm not belittling anyone, but don't start turning into Walter Mitty!
Click to expand...

100% agree again. Well apart from the RAF reg bit.
 
Liverpoolphil said:
One of things our military prides itself in is following the Rules of Engagement and Geneva Convention

Marine A broke both

The Taliban fighter was on the floor injured and caused no immediate threat to life - first aid should have been administered to the best of their abilities and then he should have been evacuated to further first aid and then dealt with properly by the authorities

Marine A was clearly guilty of manslaughter at the very least

Rules of Engagement and Geneva Convention doesn't cover "what if he then later in life goes onto kill" - that's not a justification for what he did

The public and the red tops have jumped on the bandwagon with demands he be released etc and it's wrong - he committed a crime and should serve the punishment for that crime

Aside from that I do have a problem with certain lawyers chasing cases looking to earn big money
Click to expand...

Phil, how many times have you actually had to use the ROE in a real time situation? I bet it's zero
 
richy said:
Phil, how many times have you actually had to use the ROE in a real time situation? I bet it's zero
Click to expand...

What I have or haven't done in my career in the RAF is both irrelevant to the thread and also none of your business.
 
Val said:
And for a high majority of serving personnel (current and retired) it's zero but they are there and there to stop this very scenario
Click to expand...

But no one knows how'll they'll react when the adrenaline is pumping and you're coming under fire.

For all we know marine A could've said he'd of never done what he did but until you're in the thick of it, you just don't know.
To have the holier than thou attitude with something so sensitive is completely deluded.
 
Liverpoolphil said:
What I have or haven't done in my career in the RAF is both irrelevant to the thread and also none of your business.
Click to expand...
It is when you claim to have served under the ROE for 22 years. If you were a non combatant CrabFat then just say so but please don't use your own military career as a beacon of perfection in comparison to a Royal Marine Commando on the front line.
 
SocketRocket said:
It is when you claim to have served under the ROE for 22 years. If you were a non combatant CrabFat then just say so but please don't use your own military career as a beacon of perfection in comparison to a Royal Marine Commando on the front line.
Click to expand...

Please see the mod message

PhilTheFragger said:
Can we move away from individuals military experience please
Click to expand...


You appear to get away with being agressive and point scoring towards posters on the EU thread but as previously stated it's pretty low to use this thread as some vehicle to point score or carry on a personal vendetta.

I have given my opinion on the situation and it's an opinion based both on what the facts are and also how the rules are - what I did in my career has nothing to do with the facts and doesn't change what happened and is not the discussion
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Liverpoolphil said:
Please see the mod message




You appear to get away with being agressive and point scoring towards posters on the EU thread but as previously stated it's pretty low to use this thread as some vehicle to point score or carry on a personal vendetta.

I have given my opinion on the situation and it's an opinion based both on what the facts are and also how the rules are - what I did in my career has nothing to do with the facts and doesn't change what happened and is not the discussion
Click to expand...

Please see the mod message

And the " low" comment is a bit rich especially after your "coward" comment which many saw as very low indeed.

So it's time for everybody to stop the personal digs ( last warning) ⚠️
 
richy said:
But no one knows how'll they'll react when the adrenaline is pumping and you're coming under fire.

For all we know marine A could've said he'd of never done what he did but until you're in the thick of it, you just don't know.
To have the holier than thou attitude with something so sensitive is completely deluded.
Click to expand...

I don't have a holier than thou attitude, if you know the story you'all know he wasn't under fire or in danger when he shot the guy.

Would I have done the same? I've no idea, bottom line is he broke all rules and shot an unarmed and injured man. I was defensive of Sgt Blackman before I knew more of the story but now I believe he should face the punishment for the crime he committed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top