• Looking for a smarter way to manage your heating this winter? We’ve been testing the new Aqara Radiator Thermostat W600 to see how quiet, accurate and easy it is to use around the home. Click here read our review.

War Crimes...

It's SF troops claiming their colleagues were in the wrong remember.
Well that is between them and to prove what they say is correct. Executions are legal if they pose significant threat to the soldiers involved. Nobody has yet identified that no threat was present other than say so.
 
I am saying there will be a reason behind these executions.
Yes it was specified in the recent press article:

Killing of detainees "became routine
some troops had a "mob mentality", describing their behaviour on operations as "barbaric".
show serious psychopathic traits
"They were lawless. They felt untouchable."
the SAS and SBS were making their own rules,
we'd go in with the intention of killing them, there was no attempt to capture them,
"Sometimes we'd check we'd identified the target, confirm their ID, then shoot them," he said. "Often the squadron would just go and kill all the men they found there."
killing could become "an addictive thing to do"
"intoxicated by that feeling" in Afghanistan. There were "lots of psychotic murderers", he said.

State sponsored terrorism.
 
You are so pathetic it is embarrasing talking to you. You read one BBC report and become a military expert. You are not right in the head.
And you accuse me of posting stuff that I have never posted.
I might be "not right in the head". But you're clearly a liar.
I'd prefer to be an honest fool than a liar any day.

You demonstrate that you are unable to contribute comments on topic. What a surprise. :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
 
The SF are a secretive stealth operation that operates under the radar most of the time. Their operations are conducted in secrecy and are indeed a law unto themselves. A very brave and heroic group that does a very demanding job. It is not surprising that they can get out of hand and break the rules. However I would not condemn them so quickly, especially as from what I have seen of them, they are extremely professional and ferocious soldiers.
 
Last edited:
And you accuse me of posting stuff that I have never posted.
I might be "not right in the head". But you're clearly a liar.
I'd prefer to be an honest fool than a liar any day.

You demonstrate that you are unable to contribute comments on topic. What a surprise. :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
here we go, resorting to pathetic insults. Go join mums net. It is more you.
 
yet again not reading the whole thread you do realise that bombing the building actually kills the hostage which was the missions objective was .
You really are a half wit
I also said I have seen classified rescue mission and no there was no questions asked . As they took everyone out.

You are claiming to be have been there? :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
No wonder they killed everyone including the hostage.

I suppose you'll be telling us next that you've served in the IDF. :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
 
You are claiming to be have been there? :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
No wonder they killed everyone including the hostage.

I suppose you'll be telling us next that you've served in the IDF. :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
Mate, why don't you give it a rest. I think you have reached your peak and are now offering nothing to this debate other than insults. You are just incapable of having an adult debate. I feel it is time that you left this one now. You are making a fool of yourself.
 
Yes it was specified in the recent press article:


Killing of detainees "became routine
some troops had a "mob mentality", describing their behaviour on operations as "barbaric".
show serious psychopathic traits
"They were lawless. They felt untouchable."
the SAS and SBS were making their own rules,
we'd go in with the intention of killing them, there was no attempt to capture them,
"Sometimes we'd check we'd identified the target, confirm their ID, then shoot them," he said. "Often the squadron would just go and kill all the men they found there."
killing could become "an addictive thing to do"
"intoxicated by that feeling" in Afghanistan. There were "lots of psychotic murderers", he said.

State sponsored terrorism.
That sounds like lawyer speak to me.
If these eyewitness accounts are actually from former serving members of the SAS/SBS, then first off, they really should have been vetted better, secondly, they better hope they remain anonymous, and thirdly, I don't believe these accounts come from past members, at all.
 
That sounds like lawyer speak to me.
If these eyewitness accounts are actually from former serving members of the SAS/SBS, then first off, they really should have been vetted better, secondly, they better hope they remain anonymous, and thirdly, I don't believe these accounts come from past members, at all.
Exactly
 
You gave an example of Nazi
So you claim, but you can't find it. :rolleyes:

No it is not in the public interest, why would you think it was?
Does your argument stay true for the police as well.
Or is an argument that only applies to soldiers?
No-one should be beyond reproach. That's a basic tenet of civilised democracy.
When it's jettisoned, then it's no longer a civilised democracy.

If a crime has been committed then the military comes down pretty hard.
Dishonorable discharge is hardly a sever penalty.

The allegations and investigations are not in the interests of anyone outside of the military.
In your prejudicial opinion.
Those who serve to protect society must be answerable to that society.

The Official Secrets Act is intended to not disclose information to the enemy, not to maingtain a level of secrecy within the military.
 
Back
Top