If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(BBC)   Rogue US soldier accused of killing Afghan civilians, Paladin disapproves   (bbc.co.uk) divider line 499
    More: News, Afghans, United States, Afghan civilians, Politics of Denmark, newspapers in Denmark, Kandahar Province, Kandahar, International Security Assistance Force  
•       •       •

11423 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 Mar 2012 at 1:09 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



499 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-03-11 03:00:23 PM  

rev. dave: How does one express anger in a healthy way while deployed, healthy means not using violence or weapons as stress relief?

Well, I understand that during WWII...hey, you were in France. Need I say more?
In Vietnam, does the phrase "me love you long time" mean anything to you?

Guess what doesn't work over there.
 
2012-03-11 03:01:30 PM  

Mrbogey: Have you ever stopped to realize that you're as awful as the people you hate and only by a stroke of luck did you end up on the left-wing posting on Fark and not on the right-wing posting on Stormfront?


Did you really just post that?
 
2012-03-11 03:02:02 PM  

BudTheSpud: FarkinHostile: BudTheSpud: Point taken, but what's the alternative, skippy? Court-martial slap on the wrist?


You really think that an international incident involving the cold blooded murder of over a dozen civilians with get a slap on the wrist? Really?

You obviously don't know your history.


History doesn't apply here as much as it used to. They used to be able to at least try and cover these things up. This is all over the news. Everyone wants this guy's head. And they'll most likely get it. I doubt he'll be handed over the Afghani people, and they won't be happy with how slow our judicial system is for crimes like this. But, he's going to jail, for a long time, no matter what.
 
2012-03-11 03:02:34 PM  

Ishidan: rev. dave: How does one express anger in a healthy way while deployed, healthy means not using violence or weapons as stress relief?
Well, I understand that during WWII...hey, you were in France. Need I say more?
In Vietnam, does the phrase "me love you long time" mean anything to you?

Guess what doesn't work over there.


home-grown vaginas?
 
2012-03-11 03:03:05 PM  

BudTheSpud: You think prison will be enough? Really? You really think the Afghan people are going to accept that?

Here's a hint. They won't.



I don't really care what they accept, he's an American soldier and falls under military law. He's either mentally ill and needs to be put in an institution or a sane killer that needs to be locked away for life. Basically, fark what the Afghan people want.
 
2012-03-11 03:03:54 PM  
FarkinHostile: BronyMedic: The idea that an American Citizen is "No longer deserving of US Justice", a constitutional right, is a dangerous slippery slope


Soldiers do not have the same Constitutional rights as civilians. UCMJ outlines their rights.


Um, that's not exactly true. Certain rights are restricted by the UCMJ - such as the freedom of speech, but the UCMJ does not eliminate the right to have a trial by jury, protection from being extradited to a foreign country for a crime committed under US Jurisdiction, to not be forced into self-incrimination, or against cruel and unusual punishment.

http://www.answers.com/topic/citizens-rights-in-the-military
 
2012-03-11 03:05:19 PM  

Ivandrago: BudTheSpud: FarkinHostile: BudTheSpud: Point taken, but what's the alternative, skippy? Court-martial slap on the wrist?


You really think that an international incident involving the cold blooded murder of over a dozen civilians with get a slap on the wrist? Really?

You obviously don't know your history.

History doesn't apply here as much as it used to. They used to be able to at least try and cover these things up. This is all over the news. Everyone wants this guy's head. And they'll most likely get it. I doubt he'll be handed over the Afghani people, and they won't be happy with how slow our judicial system is for crimes like this. But, he's going to jail, for a long time, no matter what.


Agree. I suspect he'll get life, this is assuming he doesn't plead not guilty by reason of insanity and make it stick ( a real possibility here). No matter what the result, the Afghans will still hate us just as much as they did yesterday.
 
2012-03-11 03:05:41 PM  

FarkinHostile: BudTheSpud: Point taken, but what's the alternative, skippy? Court-martial slap on the wrist?


You really think that an international incident involving the cold blooded murder of over a dozen civilians with get a slap on the wrist? Really?


8,813+ Civilians have been killed in Afghanistan,
Please name everyone who did not get a slap on the wrist,
Thanks....
 
2012-03-11 03:05:44 PM  

BronyMedic: In this case, we need to act like we talk, and see justice served.


I agree, but I still don't think we will see that happen. And even if it is enough for us, it won't be enough for the Afghans. If they don't see this guy getting his, they will riot. Plain and simple.
 
2012-03-11 03:06:17 PM  

BudTheSpud: FarkinHostile: BudTheSpud: Point taken, but what's the alternative, skippy? Court-martial slap on the wrist?


You really think that an international incident involving the cold blooded murder of over a dozen civilians with get a slap on the wrist? Really?

You obviously don't know your history.



Mmmm....yeah. You're right. Because what happened in Nam back in 1968 has a lot to do what will happen today in 2012.

Things are different nowadays. This is a huge international incident. If anything, they will make an example of this guy, rightfully so.

Soldiers do life for a whole lot less nowadays. Showing me a rare arguable exception doesn't invalidate that. If he doesn't get the DP he'll never see the outside of Leavenworth.
 
2012-03-11 03:06:38 PM  
BudTheSpud: You really think the Afghan people are going to accept that?

It does not matter what the Afgani people want. He committed a crime as an American Soldier, under American Jurisdiction, while serving in a zone of active conflict. According to the rules of the UCMJ, he is the jurisdiction of the United States alone.
 
2012-03-11 03:06:38 PM  
On the off-chance the Farkette who is worried about her husband over there is still reading through this steaming pile of crap, I am offering up a little prayer for his well being and safe return.
 
2012-03-11 03:08:06 PM  

9beers: Basically, fark what the Afghan people want.


And you wonder why we are in this mess in the first place...
 
2012-03-11 03:08:42 PM  
In Game of Thrones, we would offer this soldier's head to the Afghan leaders in the hopes they accepted our gesture.
 
2012-03-11 03:10:05 PM  
Anyone remember when Bush apologized to Iraq for the soldier that used the Koran as target practice?

No?
 
2012-03-11 03:10:10 PM  

zerkalo: Submitter spelled "terrorist" wrong


THIS!!!!
 
2012-03-11 03:10:28 PM  
From an article on MSNBC...

"This is an anti-human and anti-Islamic act," said Khan. "Nobody is allowed in any religion in the world to kill children and women."

www.estatevaults.com

O RLY?
 
2012-03-11 03:11:17 PM  

BudTheSpud: 9beers: BudTheSpud: Point taken, but what's the alternative, skippy? Court-martial slap on the wrist? Strip his rank?

You do realize that the military can send people to prison too, right?

You think prison will be enough? Really? You really think the Afghan people are going to accept that?

Here's a hint. They won't.


Here is the rub with that. While I agree this guy, and anyone else even remotely involved in this or who failed to stop it, belongs infront of a firing squad, that takes time when you do it our way, and rightfully so.

The locals there won't accept anything else other than stringing him up right now.

You could make the argument for just turning him over to them, but that isn't going to happen, and for good reason.
 
2012-03-11 03:11:32 PM  

BronyMedic: Um, that's not exactly true. Certain rights are restricted by the UCMJ - such as the freedom of speech, but the UCMJ does not eliminate the right to have a trial by jury, protection from being extradited to a foreign country for a crime committed under US Jurisdiction, to not be forced into self-incrimination, or against cruel and unusual punishment.



Yes, but those are not CONSTITUTIONAL rights, those are his rights under the UCMJ. Some rights are shared, but to say that he is covered by the Constitution because he can't be turned over is like saying we are covered by the British Constitution because it contains Habeas Corpus. Some similar rights, but totally different in many others.
 
2012-03-11 03:14:03 PM  
String him up by his balls. He's an insult to this country, to his fellow servicemen and women, and to the uniform he wears. Drum him out, send him to Leavenworth, make him break rocks in a big yard for the rest of his life.

There's no excuse for this. None.
 
2012-03-11 03:15:20 PM  

Sun Worshiping Dog Launcher: During my days of Warcraft, I found all too often that if douchebaggery was being committed, especially if it involved some level of cowardice, it was going to be a Paladin doing it. Being able to wear plate, bubble and heal to full health and/or bubble and hearth seemed to attract far more asshats than the rogue class did.


Funny thing about Paladins.
The real life (no magical healing, just basically elite knights with holy backing) paladins had to work their asses off to be better than the average knight. There was also discipline: perform an abomination that would piss off your holy sponsor, and you can kiss that sponsorship goodbye if the sponsor finds out about it.

From that grew the D&D-style paladin. A super-knight with superhuman healing powers, but the catch bears down: your powers stem from your deity, and your deity is omniscient, so act like an asshat or hang out with asshats and you'll catch a lightning bolt that blows your armor right off you and stamps "FIRED PALADIN" on your ass. Power at a price.

Now, though. There's no behavior restrictions. You have all the advanced powers of a D&D paladin, but nobody putting the price of having to be lawful good as a condition of holding it.
(I am informed that even D&D went this route, removing the Lawful Good Or Else rule in the latest edition, I don't know, haven't played for years.)
 
2012-03-11 03:16:12 PM  

LastVodka: Anyone remember when Bush apologized to Iraq for the soldier that used the Koran as target practice?

No?


It only matters when Obama does it (new window)
 
2012-03-11 03:16:37 PM  
Everyone hide behind the pile of bard corpses until this blows over.

/obscure? nah
 
2012-03-11 03:16:42 PM  
I don't care.
 
2012-03-11 03:17:28 PM  

FarkinHostile: BronyMedic: Um, that's not exactly true. Certain rights are restricted by the UCMJ - such as the freedom of speech, but the UCMJ does not eliminate the right to have a trial by jury, protection from being extradited to a foreign country for a crime committed under US Jurisdiction, to not be forced into self-incrimination, or against cruel and unusual punishment.


Yes, but those are not CONSTITUTIONAL rights, those are his rights under the UCMJ. Some rights are shared, but to say that he is covered by the Constitution because he can't be turned over is like saying we are covered by the British Constitution because it contains Habeas Corpus. Some similar rights, but totally different in many others.


There are a handful of treaties the US is a holdout on for that very reason though. There is a problem with allowing your soldiers to be judged by local laws and processes. I'm sure half our army in afghanistan right now commits "crimes" under local laws on a daily basis. Do we turn over every soldier who knocks boots with someone else to the locals? Who decides to switch religions? Who cracks open a smuggled beer?
 
2012-03-11 03:17:59 PM  
FarkinHostile: Yes, but those are not CONSTITUTIONAL rights, those are his rights under the UCMJ. Some rights are shared, but to say that he is covered by the Constitution because he can't be turned over is like saying we are covered by the British Constitution because it contains Habeas Corpus. Some similar rights, but totally different in many others.

You do realize you're playing semantics here, right? The UCMJ is written to protect the fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth amendment.

That was the whole essence of what I said, and the whole issue you're arguing against.
 
2012-03-11 03:18:18 PM  
Came to read the stupid comments. And the smart ones.

Not disappointed. Plenty of both.
 
2012-03-11 03:18:34 PM  
Right now theres probably thousands of folks in Afghanistan getting ready to riot in the country over this. The military has a huge PR mess on their hands. The way they handle this could end up deciding the outcome of this whole war.

Any hopes of winning the hearts and minds of the people depends on how they percieve justice being served to this guy. The military would be smart to not take anything off the table right now.
 
2012-03-11 03:19:11 PM  

LineNoise: FarkinHostile: BronyMedic: Um, that's not exactly true. Certain rights are restricted by the UCMJ - such as the freedom of speech, but the UCMJ does not eliminate the right to have a trial by jury, protection from being extradited to a foreign country for a crime committed under US Jurisdiction, to not be forced into self-incrimination, or against cruel and unusual punishment.


Yes, but those are not CONSTITUTIONAL rights, those are his rights under the UCMJ. Some rights are shared, but to say that he is covered by the Constitution because he can't be turned over is like saying we are covered by the British Constitution because it contains Habeas Corpus. Some similar rights, but totally different in many others.

There are a handful of treaties the US is a holdout on for that very reason though. There is a problem with allowing your soldiers to be judged by local laws and processes. I'm sure half our army in afghanistan right now commits "crimes" under local laws on a daily basis. Do we turn over every soldier who knocks boots with someone else to the locals? Who decides to switch religions? Who cracks open a smuggled beer?


hell, I'm sure we have some openly gay soldiers in afghanistan right now. I'm sure your typical local government there would have a problem with it. Should we hand them over as well?
 
2012-03-11 03:19:24 PM  

LineNoise: and anyone else even remotely involved in this


So you're in favor of a firing squad for his buddy or superior who might have thought that he was acting a little strange but didn't think it was anything worth worrying about?
 
2012-03-11 03:19:35 PM  

BronyMedic: BudTheSpud: You really think the Afghan people are going to accept that?

It does not matter what the Afgani people want. He committed a crime as an American Soldier, under American Jurisdiction, while serving in a zone of active conflict. According to the rules of the UCMJ, he is the jurisdiction of the United States alone.


Are you sure that he committed his crimes while acting as a US Soldier? Seems to me that he was off-duty. I would HOPE that his responsibilities do not include shooting civilians! Let's pray that military distances itself from this atrocity by pulling out the "outside the scope of his duties" mantra.

If I am not mistaken, Panetta has already voiced this exact phrase. Give him to the Afghanis if he was not soldiering for the US when he did it.
 
2012-03-11 03:20:11 PM  

Fark_Guy_Rob: LeoffDaGrate: o5iiawah: Oh good, this is another thing for which our president can apologize.

You don't think he should apologize? Tell me then, oh wise one, who is so knowledgeable in international relations, what should the President do and say?

We don't need international relations. We have tanks.


I don't need to do the right thing if I can beat you up. Braun is always best.

img152.imageshack.us
 
2012-03-11 03:20:35 PM  

the_chief: I don't care.


You should, but I'm not surprised that you don't. People in this country care about very little that happens beyond their own front doors. This man wears the uniform of the US Army, and this is what he's doing in our country's name, to a sovereign country's citizens.

It's an offense and an affront to every American. It shames us all.
 
2012-03-11 03:20:40 PM  
We killed Osama. Time to GTFO.
 
2012-03-11 03:20:58 PM  

Turbo Cojones: BronyMedic: BudTheSpud: You really think the Afghan people are going to accept that?

It does not matter what the Afgani people want. He committed a crime as an American Soldier, under American Jurisdiction, while serving in a zone of active conflict. According to the rules of the UCMJ, he is the jurisdiction of the United States alone.

Are you sure that he committed his crimes while acting as a US Soldier? Seems to me that he was off-duty. I would HOPE that his responsibilities do not include shooting civilians! Let's pray that military distances itself from this atrocity by pulling out the "outside the scope of his duties" mantra.

If I am not mistaken, Panetta has already voiced this exact phrase. Give him to the Afghanis if he was not soldiering for the US when he did it.


You know how I know you've never served in the Military or had any connection to it whatsoever?
 
2012-03-11 03:21:47 PM  

ApeShaft: But it's ok to execute the mentally retarded - right?


I never said that, did I? I think there's a huge problem with the way that people with mental disorders are treated by the justice system.
 
2012-03-11 03:22:12 PM  

9beers: LineNoise: and anyone else even remotely involved in this

So you're in favor of a firing squad for his buddy or superior who might have thought that he was acting a little strange but didn't think it was anything worth worrying about?


honestly, in the scope of this, if they had an inkling this guy was going to snap and didn't report it, there should be hell to pay. I suppose its somehow possible a guy wakes up in the morning and just snaps, but this guys CO and his buddies have an obligation in my mind to make sure that doesn't happen. Its no different than some kid getting his dads gun and shooting up a school. The parents farked up, and should be held accountable as well.

(yea, firing squad might be severe, unless this guy spent the last couple days saying he was going to do this).
 
2012-03-11 03:22:21 PM  
According to the Wikipedia the U.S. military hasn't executed anyone since 1961, but it's still an available punishment for murder.

Two-step solution for this:

1. Rapid court martial and execution

2. GTFO

I don't know how you could continue to have American soldiers in the presence of armed Afghan 'allies' after this, given the treatment of revenge in their culture.
 
2012-03-11 03:22:21 PM  

Ishidan: rev. dave: How does one express anger in a healthy way while deployed, healthy means not using violence or weapons as stress relief?
Well, I understand that during WWII...hey, you were in France. Need I say more?
In Vietnam, does the phrase "me love you long time" mean anything to you?

Guess what doesn't work over there.


All the best goats are spoken for
 
2012-03-11 03:22:33 PM  
At least it wasn't a defenseless Koran. Then Muslims would be angry.
 
2012-03-11 03:23:24 PM  

Sun Worshiping Dog Launcher: During my days of Warcraft, I found all too often that if douchebaggery was being committed, especially if it involved some level of cowardice, it was going to be a Paladin doing it. Being able to wear plate, bubble and heal to full health and/or bubble and hearth seemed to attract far more asshats than the rogue class did.


You should still never Trust a Rogue.
 
2012-03-11 03:23:25 PM  

CharlieBrown: We killed Osama. Time to GTFO.


We should have been out of that entire area, not just Afghanistan, years ago, and I hold both Bush and Obama accountable for that. Neither were winnable wars, because we weren't fighting a people, we were fighting an ideology. An ideology that will continue to exist no matter how many people are slaughtered.
 
2012-03-11 03:23:55 PM  
Ain't payback a biatch!
 
2012-03-11 03:24:10 PM  
I had a friend who argued they could start a world war with a video camera, a Koran, a full bladder, a full bowel and YouTube.

I told them they were full of shiat. Now I'm not so sure anymore.
 
2012-03-11 03:25:32 PM  

mltain: Ain't payback a biatch!



I wish there was a "Stupid" button as well as a "Smart" and "Funny" one.
 
2012-03-11 03:27:00 PM  
LineNoise: I think part of the problem with that is what we consider a mental disorder today.

Should depression be an excuse for this, for instance?


The legal definition of insanity, and the medical definition of a mental illness, are not even similar. Legal insanity is not knowing or being able to differentiate that committing a crime was "wrong", or being in an involuntary state of mind which you couldn't have stopped from killing someone.

A paranoid scitzophrenic who murders his room mate because he thought he was going to kill him first may have mitigating factors due to mental illness, but that doesn't mean he's not guilty of a crime because of it.
 
2012-03-11 03:27:19 PM  
Alright, enough of this.

This slanderous treatment of Rogue has to stop.

images.wikia.com

She even got naked for us in True Blood.
 
2012-03-11 03:29:19 PM  
if you put someone for 10 years in a sand pit where they watch as mindless religious farks blow themselves and everyone else up over a book or sky wizard.... you'd probably lose your mind a bit too.

it sucks yes, and is probably the best example of why we have NO BUSINESS in that F'd up part of the world. It's been in dispute for centuries, CENTURIES. Did we think we could just stroll in wave the us flag and everyone would start enjoying the sweet life?

The guy in the article has problems, but if some of my best buddies got murdered because they threw a book in the trash... I'd probably lose my mind as well.

The entire thing is a lost cause -- just imagine the 1.3 TRILLION dollars that have been spent over there that could have gone to upgrading our electrical grid, aging bridges, or other things we need. Instead we spent it all on a people that hate us and have nothing to show for it but death.
 
2012-03-11 03:29:50 PM  

BudTheSpud: mltain: Ain't payback a biatch!


I wish there was a "Stupid" button as well as a "Smart" and "Funny" one.


A "troll" button would get more use that Smart or Funny.

Not least because Fark has more trolltastic comments than Smart or Funny comments, but still.
 
2012-03-11 03:29:58 PM  
I feel sorry for everyone involved, the dude obviously snapped from stress of being there and or something and the people whos family members that were killed are just regular people who didnt choose to be born into a shiathole country full of idiots. It especially sucks when kids are the victims, children are the same no matter where they're from.
 
Displayed 50 of 499 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report