Discussion in 'World Events' started by Captain Kremmen, Jan 12, 2012.
Read more: http://battleland.blogs.time.com/20...and-the-dark-complexity-of-war/#ixzz1jSWqDF6W
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
A war crime? No.
Immature behavior and possibly in violation of the UCMJ (or other applicable laws)? I happen to think so.
Plus, they've just embarrassed the nation. There was no need for this. They should be discharged, if not court martialed for this business.
I see the difference. And I think their prior conduct--especially any good service to the nation-- should be taken into account. I don't think that much more needs to happen other than a "less than honorable" discharge, but they'll probably get a "dishonorable" discharge.
The needs of the many, and all that.
The US cannot allow this to go unpunished, regardless of how innocuous their actions were because of what it will cost the nation. Besides, they simply should have thought a little more about what they were doing.
In the business world, we call this an "earned hassle". That means: guilt-schmilt-- they are intelligent and could have acted differently. It's about personal responsibility for their actions. Therefore, they have no right to cry about the repercussions.
No doubt Patton would have whipped his out too, but the days of Patton are finished.
He wouldn't make a sergeant in a professional army unit today.
The top American general in Afghanistan, Gen. John R. Allen of the Marines, expressed his disgust over the video on Friday, saying the images “are in direct opposition to everything the military stands for.”
Well there's the rub.
If you just discharge them or put them in jail then there is now a "Get out of Combat Free" card.
Just piss on the first dead soldier you see (any soldier will probably do) and post a video of it.
No, actually it wouldn't be a "Get out of Combat Free" card. Most people would find jail time and a criminal record to be a heavy price to pay for committing pointless acts of animalistic barbarism.
When did pissing on a dead body become a CRIMINAL act?
Desecrating corpses is a criminal act and in war, goes against the Geneva Convention as well as military law..
To reiterate, just for you Arthur, since you seem so shocked that it is a criminal act to desecrate a corpse:
Practice Relating to Rule 113. Treatment of the Dead
Section A. Respect for the dead
Geneva Convention IV
Article 16, second paragraph, of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV provides: “As far as military considerations allow, each Party to the conflict shall facilitate the steps taken … to protect [the killed] against … ill-treatment.”
Additional Protocol I
Article 34(1) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I provides: “The remains of persons who have died for reasons related to occupation or in detention resulting from occupation or hostilities … shall be respected”.
Additional Protocol II
Article 4 of the 1977 Additional Protocol II provides:
1. All persons who do not take a direct part or who have ceased to take part in hostilities, whether or not their liberty has been restricted, are entitled to respect for their person [and] honour …
2. Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, the following acts against the persons referred to in paragraph I are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever:
(e) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment …
Pursuant to Article 8(2)(b)(xxi) and (c)(ii) of the 1998 ICC Statute, “[c]ommitting outrages upon personal dignity” constitutes a war crime in both international and non-international armed conflicts.
United States of America
The US Field Manual (1956) provides that “maltreatment of dead bodies” is a war crime.
United States of America
The US Instructor’s Guide (1985) states: “In addition to the grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions, the following acts are further examples of war crimes: … mutilating or mistreating dead bodies”
United States of America
The US Naval Handbook (1995) provides that “mutilation and other mistreatment of the dead” are representative war crimes.
It then goes on to provide case law and domestic laws as well.
I don't need to go to war to know that some things are clearly wrong.
Are you claiming that one needs to go to war to know the difference between right and wrong?
Argue your way out of that one Arthur.
I'm sure you'll give it a crack!
Arthur. Putting the Ar back in 'argue'.
Many, many decades ago as far as I understand it. If there was ever any doubt about it all these years, as soon as you personally started defending it I think there was no longer any ambiguity.
Yeah, let's throw them in prison for a couple of years.
Seems an appropriate punishment.
Sounds good to me. I'd rather be given the right to have my own gun than have barbarians like that running around defending my "freedom".
Since they clearly violated rules of conduct, since they have now aided the enemy by giving them ammunition against the USA, since they clearly were acting like insufferable assholes and since they clearly weren't ashamed of the act until caught, if that is to happen, then it is to happen.
As you said, if we just discharge them, then other soldiers may see "pissing on a corpse" as a way to get out.
Bet on stronger rules and training after this, making life much harder for the next idiots who act this way.
After breaching the rules of conduct, laws and rules of law, various conventions and treaties, not to mention embarrassing the USMC, the US itself, and as has been pointed out by others in this thread, aiding the enemy, I'd say they should be going for more than "a couple of years".
And legally, it seems their actions may very well constitute a war crime.
if they tried that shit stateside, they would certainly do some time
You really think pissing on a corpse is a felony?
So let's think this through.
Let's say my neighbor who I've been fighting with for years drops dead in my front yard while attempting to vandalize my mailbox.
It's night and no one can see me, but I drop Trouw and piss on him.
You think I should go to prison for that?
Clearly the sense of PROPORTION has escaped a lot of you.
They were corpses.
Pissing on them didn't do them any more harm then the 9mm round did.
Yeah, I can hear it now:
Why are you in here?
Manslaughter for driving while drunk. You?
I pissed on a corpse.
Ah, too bad.
No, it is NOT a WAR CRIME
HERE is the legal US definition of a War Crime.
1) Prohibited conduct.— In subsection (c)(3), the term “grave breach of common Article 3” means any conduct (such conduct constituting a grave breach of common Article 3 of the international conventions done at Geneva August 12, 1949), as follows:
(A) Torture.— The act of a person who commits, or conspires or attempts to commit, an act specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control for the purpose of obtaining information or a confession, punishment, intimidation, coercion, or any reason based on discrimination of any kind.
(B) Cruel or inhuman treatment.— The act of a person who commits, or conspires or attempts to commit, an act intended to inflict severe or serious physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions), including serious physical abuse, upon another within his custody or control.
(C) Performing biological experiments.— The act of a person who subjects, or conspires or attempts to subject, one or more persons within his custody or physical control to biological experiments without a legitimate medical or dental purpose and in so doing endangers the body or health of such person or persons.
(D) Murder.— The act of a person who intentionally kills, or conspires or attempts to kill, or kills whether intentionally or unintentionally in the course of committing any other offense under this subsection, one or more persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including those placed out of combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause.
(E) Mutilation or maiming.— The act of a person who intentionally injures, or conspires or attempts to injure, or injures whether intentionally or unintentionally in the course of committing any other offense under this subsection, one or more persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including those placed out of combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, by disfiguring the person or persons by any mutilation thereof or by permanently disabling any member, limb, or organ of his body, without any legitimate medical or dental purpose.
(F) Intentionally causing serious bodily injury.— The act of a person who intentionally causes, or conspires or attempts to cause, serious bodily injury to one or more persons, including lawful combatants, in violation of the law of war.
(G) Rape.— The act of a person who forcibly or with coercion or threat of force wrongfully invades, or conspires or attempts to invade, the body of a person by penetrating, however slightly, the anal or genital opening of the victim with any part of the body of the accused, or with any foreign object.
(H) Sexual assault or abuse.— The act of a person who forcibly or with coercion or threat of force engages, or conspires or attempts to engage, in sexual contact with one or more persons, or causes, or conspires or attempts to cause, one or more persons to engage in sexual contact.
(I) Taking hostages.— The act of a person who, having knowingly seized or detained one or more persons, threatens to kill, injure, or continue to detain such person or persons with the intent of compelling any nation, person other than the hostage, or group of persons to act or refrain from acting as an explicit or implicit condition for the safety or release of such person or persons.
need a jump start?
should i cite statutes?
watching you flounder is fun
Yes, please do.
Let's see if you can come up with a statute that makes peeing on a corpse a felony.
Let's put it this way Arthur, If your neighbour, you know, the one you'd been feuding with for years (is anybody here having trouble imagining that???) dies of a heart attack in your yard and instead of calling an ambulance or doing CPR, you decide to celebrate the demise of your nemesis by urinating all over his dead body. And being you, you do it with a flourish, write your name, piss in his mouth, hoot, do a little jig, nobody's watching, it's all fine, the fucker's dead anyway but with all that hootin' and hollerin' and shit, the dead man's son, turns on the lights and finds you pissing on his dead daddy and in a fit of rage, rips your lungs out.
Who do you think will go to jail. Him or you?
Separate names with a comma.