US marines pissing on terrorist dead bodies

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
No baiting, please!
 

Armand2REP

CHINI EXPERT
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
13,811
Likes
6,734
Country flag
Why are they dumb enough to post this on Liveleak? They don't think it will come back and bite them.
 

Godless-Kafir

DFI Buddha
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2010
Messages
5,842
Likes
1,837
Country flag
No baiting, please!

This does look like bait but this is an continuation of discussion from another thread, JayaATL is a mallu and he said he is american and everyone who lives in the US should only be loyal to the US and added some India mocking to good effect and that causes me doubts of why americans need to come here when they dont care.
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
I understand your angst.

But one has to see that the tread does not go down in flames.

Thanks for your cooperation!
 

Tamil Arasan

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2012
Messages
115
Likes
147
It is a big deal and let me tell you why. You have a code of conduct, even in the heat of battle. Even with inhuman people like these terrorist or else it leads to a slippery slope. A slippery slope where you saw Indian soldiers bodies returned back with torture signs all over it. you have to have your soldiers maintain higher standards... At all times. Now these guys are a handful but the marine core will investigate and dole the appropriate punishment that fits the misconduct. It is misconduct and not a 'crime'
"A slippery slope where you saw Indian soldiers bodies returned back with torture signs all over it."

But you can see on the below video were the dead corpse of Pakistani soldiers are returned to the retreating Pakistani army in the final days of Kargil war with full dignity by Indian army, also you can see on the video where the Pakistani army men come with white flag to collect their colleges body and the best part is Indian army men salute when the dead body cross them, very rare video footage from any battlefield...

 
Last edited by a moderator:

ejazr

Ambassador
Joined
Oct 8, 2009
Messages
4,523
Likes
1,388
Geneva convention applies to Taliban, but not Al Qaeda. Atleast that is the DoD position back in 2002 under Bush. And it makes sense because Taliban are fighting within Afghanistan only.

Defense.gov News Article: Geneva Convention Applies to Taliban, not Al Qaeda
WASHINGTON, Feb. 7, 2002 – President Bush said the United States would regard the Geneva Conventions as applying to Taliban detainees under U.S. control -- but not Al Qaeda detainees.

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said today the United States would continue to treat all detainees humanely and in accordance with standards set by the Geneva Conventions.

Bush's decision does not materially change the way all detainees will be treated by the United States nor does it confer prisoner of war status on Taliban members. U.S. officials will continue to call both Taliban and Al Qaeda members "detainees."

Afghanistan signed the Geneva Convention of 1949. U.S. government lawyers determined the convention applies to Taliban captured since the war on terrorism began.

"The reality is the set of facts that exist today with the Al Qaeda and the Taliban were not necessarily the set of facts that were considered when the Geneva Convention was fashioned," Rumsfeld said in the Pentagon in an informal talk during the signing of a U.S.-Canada agreement on the Joint Strike Fighter.

Rumsfeld said the president decided the Al Qaeda would not fit under the Geneva Convention, because the Geneva Convention is an instrument among states in conflict. "The Al Qaeda is not a state; it is a terrorist organization," he said.

Bush decided that the Taliban would fit in the framework of the convention even though neither the United Nations nor virtually any country in the world recognized the Taliban as Afghanistan's legitimate government.

Rumsfeld said U.S. lawyers took their time in making their assessment because, "while it makes no difference in how these individuals will be treated, it could be considered a precedent for the future."

The decision means there is no need for tribunals under the Geneva Convention to judge the status of the Taliban or Al Qaeda detainees. The convention is written in a way that, in areas where there is doubt about the status of detainees, a tribunal sets their status. The tribunal is really a screening process, Rumsfeld said. However, a screening process has been in place since the detainees were captured. The process includes the defense establishment, the Department of Justice and the Central Intelligence Agency, he said.

The Geneva Convention tribunal process should not be confused with the proposed military commissions the United States may use to try some detainees for crimes.
The funny thing is that now that US is enganing in peace talks with the Taliban, the Taliban are acting mature and saying that this won't hamper peace talks
Video angers Afghans but won't harm talks - Taliban | WORLD News
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
This is a tricky question.

It applies to soldiers (people who are in uniform) and civilians in the war zone

Interestingly, it also considers armed conflict against colonial domination and foreign occupation as having qualified as an international conflict.
It is a tricky question. Taliban thinks the US has occupied its country. The US should also remember well how for a couple of decades it toed the line of one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter. At the end of the day, it's all about victors justice. The US has clearly stayed away from ICJ and does not recognize its authority and any indictment of war crimes. Smart policy considering the number of wars the US makes. "Far sighted" I would say
 

civfanatic

Retired
Ambassador
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
4,562
Likes
2,570
I am not a soldier or anything like it, but I believe there should be some civility when conducting war. The dead should be respected and left in peace; it doesn't matter if they were your enemies and it doesn't matter how reprehensible they were.

Maybe I am asking for too much, but I think such actions by soldiers are disgusting and degrades the professionalism of modern armies. This is a universal rule that applies to all armies, and I am proud that the IA has historically had a good record of treating the fallen with respect.
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
I am not a soldier or anything like it, but I believe there should be some civility when conducting war. The dead should be respected and left in peace; it doesn't matter if they were your enemies and it doesn't matter how reprehensible they were.

Maybe I am asking for too much, but I think such actions by soldiers are disgusting and degrades the professionalism of modern armies. This is a universal rule that applies to all armies, and I am proud that the IA has historically had a good record of treating the fallen with respect.
There are many reasons why the US troops at times behave like this.

It is their training that lays it thick that the Americans are supermen and this has been so far proved in recent history that they were the law by themselves.

This aspect of psychology continues to prevail, or so it appears.

Hence, they do not take it lightly that anyone can challenge them or kill their people so wantonly.

This act is the deed of soldiers who are ultra jingoist and cannot handle the reality that they are being faced with these days.
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
It is a tricky question. Taliban thinks the US has occupied its country. The US should also remember well how for a couple of decades it toed the line of one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter. At the end of the day, it's all about victors justice. The US has clearly stayed away from ICJ and does not recognize its authority and any indictment of war crimes. Smart policy considering the number of wars the US makes. "Far sighted" I would say
That is true that they were backing the Pakistanis who trotted out the line that the so called Kashmiri terrorists operating in Kashmir were Freedom Fighters and not terrorists.

However, in geopolitics, there is nothing that is permanent.

It now suit the US to toe another line and so that is why they are following a new path that is contrary to the old refrain of yesteryears.

And it is true that the US considers itself a law by themselves.

But is there anyone to challenge them and prove that they are wrong?
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
Ejazr,

To the best of my knowledge, even though the US wants the Geneva Convention to apply to the Taliban, I don't think it has been ratified internationally and incorporated in the Geneva Convention Protocols.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
Let us appreciate one thing about the US. The US has already identified the offenders and have started investigations and they will probably be punished.

Compare this with Pakistan. Had it been them, they would have first said those videos are fake and produced by RAW/CIA/Mossad and then would have made promises and dragged its feet till the issue died out.
 
Last edited:

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
That way the US is one of the most transparent countries in the world and that indeed is laudable.
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
That is true that they were backing the Pakistanis who trotted out the line that the so called Kashmiri terrorists operating in Kashmir were Freedom Fighters and not terrorists.

However, in geopolitics, there is nothing that is permanent.

It now suit the US to toe another line and so that is why they are following a new path that is contrary to the old refrain of yesteryears.

And it is true that the US considers itself a law by themselves.

But is there anyone to challenge them and prove that they are wrong?
Sir, old Hindi saying, jiski lathi, uski bhains.
 

rock127

Maulana Rockullah
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2009
Messages
10,569
Likes
25,230
Country flag
Saw this minutes ago, looking for the video to post. Apparently sniper team members pissed on dead bodies of terrorists. This is not the conduct we approve but it is no Abu Gharib. Stand by for updates...


LiveLeak.com - Marines Humiliating dead Taliban insurgents by urinating on their bodies. Watch video here

.
Not a professional way but it also shows the level of frustration and anger fermenting in US troops as they are not leading into any solid solution.
.
.
This will only boost the terrorist to kill more americans instead of reconciliation ...... the images of Abu Ghraib, cutting fingers and now this would be used in the terrorist training camps to incite trainees.
 

rock127

Maulana Rockullah
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2009
Messages
10,569
Likes
25,230
Country flag
I just saw on another forum where pakis are crying how come Amereeki do this.... very ironical since Pakis are known for insulting and humuliating the dead bodies of "enemy" soldiers even though the same "enemy" treated paki dead soldiers as per their Army law and cremated as per Islamic rituals.......but now they are becoming cry babies and talking of Rules&Regulations, Geneva Conventions etc.
.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top