Helicopter downed over Damascus
I see here more examples of our litigation-fuelled society. Everything these days seems to come back to what will happen in court and peoples human rights, even legitimate law fighting and no matter what the victims have done themselves.
Orders do need to be obeyed. How does the commanded always know whether his commander's order is legal? I and my like have to rely on the fact that the targetting and identification have been done correctly and that the message I receive is authentic. If I wait to check out every single engagement order before obeying, I die. Simple as that. Terrible transgretion of MY human rights.
Orders do need to be obeyed. How does the commanded always know whether his commander's order is legal? I and my like have to rely on the fact that the targetting and identification have been done correctly and that the message I receive is authentic. If I wait to check out every single engagement order before obeying, I die. Simple as that. Terrible transgretion of MY human rights.
I'm not saying it's right Courtney Mil, just saying how it is and has been since 1945. I guess the world learned the hard way in the years prior where 'just following orders' can lead...
Yep, and that's the point. It's not about litigation but protecting civilians. As a member of a Western military you are subject to rigorous rules of engagement which are all tied into this notion that those who wage war are accountable for their actions.
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Torquay, England
Posts: 838
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not saying it's right Courtney Mil, just saying how it is and has been since 1945. I guess the world learned the hard way in the years prior where 'just following orders' can lead...
But as far as I am aware those trials did not prosecute the commanding officers of submarines that sunk merchant ships, or pilots that bombed our cities?
Failure to carry out a lawful order or command during times of war is not something to be encouraged and during the times you are discussing it might even have lead to summary execution.
If the command is lawful, then INSTANT compliance is both expected and required.
500N
Not just the commanders of US submarines.. If the orders are verified, then those missiles fly.
500N
Isn't that exactly what US Nuclear Sub commanders have to do
and as long as the message is real, launch the missiles as their
is no communication with HQ.
I just hope that the submariner knows the difference between "their" and "there".
Isn't that exactly what US Nuclear Sub commanders have to do
and as long as the message is real, launch the missiles as their
is no communication with HQ.
I just hope that the submariner knows the difference between "their" and "there".
If the command is lawful....
Last edited by melmothtw; 29th Aug 2012 at 16:57.
There are some intriging points here.
As an aside, the USA are currently killing dozens of people in various countries using UAVs. All the time an apology is made and some financial recompense is given to the relatives.
Is this lawful or just collateral? Or is it just because they can.......
Terrorists or freedom fighters, who decides if they are legitimate targets?
And yes I have served in the sand with the locals.
As an aside, the USA are currently killing dozens of people in various countries using UAVs. All the time an apology is made and some financial recompense is given to the relatives.
Is this lawful or just collateral? Or is it just because they can.......
Terrorists or freedom fighters, who decides if they are legitimate targets?
And yes I have served in the sand with the locals.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting that the military types supporting the actions of the helicopter gunship crew (whom were reportedly attacking people on the ground) resort to repeated insults and entirely baseless opinions about my understanding of issues!
The Government's, human rights groups and countless others, worldwide, whom believe that atrocities are being committed by the Syrian military will no doubt also become the subjects of their righteous, self styled wisdom and expertise, in the form of entirely predictable abuse.
Empathy for one's counterparts is understandable, however, citing the Nuremberg defense for the crew of a helicopter gunship that was (reported to be) firing on civilians, in a civilian area is morally indefensible and intellectually flawed.
The Government's, human rights groups and countless others, worldwide, whom believe that atrocities are being committed by the Syrian military will no doubt also become the subjects of their righteous, self styled wisdom and expertise, in the form of entirely predictable abuse.
Empathy for one's counterparts is understandable, however, citing the Nuremberg defense for the crew of a helicopter gunship that was (reported to be) firing on civilians, in a civilian area is morally indefensible and intellectually flawed.
Heli-Cal,
You should expect to find "military types" here, expressing their opinions. Probably not the right place to pick a fight on that basis.
Not sure who you're having a go at there. Is that just an anti-military thing? Sorry, don't get where you're coming from. Explain? Or do you
Finally I don't think anyone here (as has been stated before) is in a position to understand what they were doing or why. If we were facing armed insurgency in the UK, I wonder what our armed armed forces would be doing or being ordered to do.
You should expect to find "military types" here, expressing their opinions. Probably not the right place to pick a fight on that basis.
The Government's, human rights groups and countless others, worldwide, whom believe that atrocities are being committed by the Syrian military will no doubt also become the subjects of their righteous, self styled wisdom and expertise, in the form of entirely predictable abuse.
resort to repeated insults and entirely baseless opinions about my understanding of issues!
Last edited by Courtney Mil; 29th Aug 2012 at 21:21.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Detroit MI
Age: 66
Posts: 1,460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder what our armed armed forces would be doing or being ordered to do.
But that's just me...
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
" If we were facing armed insurgency in the UK, I wonder what our armed armed forces would be doing or being ordered to do."
Wouldn't it depend on who is doing the armed insurgency ?
Wouldn't it depend on who is doing the armed insurgency ?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Lancashire
Age: 48
Posts: 550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wouldn't get too stressed with the "military types". They were exactly the same with Iraq and Afghanistan before realising both wars were for bollocks reasons and not what their leaders had conned them to believe. As you can imagine, they don't pipe up too much about their idiotic beliefs/opinion/experiences on the subject now as it makes them look stupid in a way that even the vast majority of the population realise it's at best a waste of money, the sacrifice of which has been paid in the blood of poorly paid soldiers and the suffering of their families and friends. All the dicks that thought it was a good idea on here and giving it the big 'warfighter' one are now stum.
Because they are now unable to think or form an opinion for themselves, they can only believe what they're told, it's ingrained in their 'mentality'. Don't think or ask, just do.
The Machinegundemic character on here is a typical example, proper thick as 2 short planks.
Because they are now unable to think or form an opinion for themselves, they can only believe what they're told, it's ingrained in their 'mentality'. Don't think or ask, just do.
The Machinegundemic character on here is a typical example, proper thick as 2 short planks.
Last edited by Thelma Viaduct; 30th Aug 2012 at 05:20.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am a military type.
To me this is all fairly clear cut and easily explained.
1. War is inherently bad, but in a combatant versus combatant situation we military types are able to determine which team we would like to win and which we would like to see lose. How we have arrived at this opinion is up to us, but usually has ingredients such as an opinion on the team's cause, whether we have an affiliation with the country, like the uniforms etc etc. In this situation we quite naturally see losses on one side as bad and losses on the other side as good. Losses are still losses, but it's a tough game.
2. If we really couldn't care less about the conflict due to geographic dis-location or the two sides meaning nothing to us ideologically then one would hope we viewed all loss of life as sad.
3. If it were proven that any combatant knowingly used any degree of force on a non-combatant, particularly lethal force, then we would obviously disapprove no matter which team they were on. We would hope that the criminals were brought to book in a court of law.
4. Being a military type one accepts that war is a rough old game and those caught not playing by the rules might be lucky enough to get to a court, they might not. I don't approve of summary 'justice', because to me it isn't just - but I am not naive enough to think it may not happen.
In the case of the Mi-17 being shot down I feel sorry for the aircrew. I have no reason to suspect that they were deliberately targeting non-combatants and even acknowledge that to discriminate in what they perceive to be a COIN operation is probably incredibly hard. That being said, from what I have read, the pro-regime forces and militias have carried out some awful atrocities and I would like to see the rebels win this one. There is of course evidence that some rebels are guilty of similar. So on balance I would like the rebels to win, which they must do militarily, so the loss to the regime of a helo is a good thing. But I do think that the crew might just have been doing their job in a perfectly legal way. Hard lines. Tough game.
To me this is all fairly clear cut and easily explained.
1. War is inherently bad, but in a combatant versus combatant situation we military types are able to determine which team we would like to win and which we would like to see lose. How we have arrived at this opinion is up to us, but usually has ingredients such as an opinion on the team's cause, whether we have an affiliation with the country, like the uniforms etc etc. In this situation we quite naturally see losses on one side as bad and losses on the other side as good. Losses are still losses, but it's a tough game.
2. If we really couldn't care less about the conflict due to geographic dis-location or the two sides meaning nothing to us ideologically then one would hope we viewed all loss of life as sad.
3. If it were proven that any combatant knowingly used any degree of force on a non-combatant, particularly lethal force, then we would obviously disapprove no matter which team they were on. We would hope that the criminals were brought to book in a court of law.
4. Being a military type one accepts that war is a rough old game and those caught not playing by the rules might be lucky enough to get to a court, they might not. I don't approve of summary 'justice', because to me it isn't just - but I am not naive enough to think it may not happen.
In the case of the Mi-17 being shot down I feel sorry for the aircrew. I have no reason to suspect that they were deliberately targeting non-combatants and even acknowledge that to discriminate in what they perceive to be a COIN operation is probably incredibly hard. That being said, from what I have read, the pro-regime forces and militias have carried out some awful atrocities and I would like to see the rebels win this one. There is of course evidence that some rebels are guilty of similar. So on balance I would like the rebels to win, which they must do militarily, so the loss to the regime of a helo is a good thing. But I do think that the crew might just have been doing their job in a perfectly legal way. Hard lines. Tough game.
If we were facing armed insurgency in the UK, I wonder what our armed armed forces would be doing or being ordered to do.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heli-Cal,
You should expect to find "military types" here, expressing their opinions. Probably not the right place to pick a fight on that basis.
The generic term is used for current/former military personnel, irrespective of branch/rank. I don't pick fights, that is your false assumption!
Quote:
The Government's, human rights groups and countless others, worldwide, whom believe that atrocities are being committed by the Syrian military will no doubt also become the subjects of their righteous, self styled wisdom and expertise, in the form of entirely predictable abuse.
Not sure who you're having a go at there. Is that just an anti-military thing? Sorry, don't get where you're coming from. Explain? Or do you
I am not having a go at anyone, "their righteous, self styled wisdom and expertise, in the form of entirely predictable abuse" is reference to the military types and their abuse as posted, not your imaginary "anti-military thing"
Quote:
resort to repeated insults and entirely baseless opinions about my understanding of issues!
Finally I don't think anyone here (as has been stated before) is in a position to understand what they were doing or why. If we were facing armed insurgency in the UK, I wonder what our armed armed forces would be doing or being ordered to do.
Bumble bee spotting, submarine commanders, "armed insurgency in the UK", is there a collective reading comprehension/intellectual difficulty with recognizing that the crew of that helicopter gunship were reported to have been firing into civilian areas... In Syria!
I accept that certain military types subjugate free thought and simply do as they are told, and to them, "INSTANT compliance is both expected and required", but ease off with the persecution complex and recognize and respect that others do actually think for themselves, and may actually express comments that do not support military atrocities against civilians!
You should expect to find "military types" here, expressing their opinions. Probably not the right place to pick a fight on that basis.
The generic term is used for current/former military personnel, irrespective of branch/rank. I don't pick fights, that is your false assumption!
Quote:
The Government's, human rights groups and countless others, worldwide, whom believe that atrocities are being committed by the Syrian military will no doubt also become the subjects of their righteous, self styled wisdom and expertise, in the form of entirely predictable abuse.
Not sure who you're having a go at there. Is that just an anti-military thing? Sorry, don't get where you're coming from. Explain? Or do you
I am not having a go at anyone, "their righteous, self styled wisdom and expertise, in the form of entirely predictable abuse" is reference to the military types and their abuse as posted, not your imaginary "anti-military thing"
Quote:
resort to repeated insults and entirely baseless opinions about my understanding of issues!
Finally I don't think anyone here (as has been stated before) is in a position to understand what they were doing or why. If we were facing armed insurgency in the UK, I wonder what our armed armed forces would be doing or being ordered to do.
Bumble bee spotting, submarine commanders, "armed insurgency in the UK", is there a collective reading comprehension/intellectual difficulty with recognizing that the crew of that helicopter gunship were reported to have been firing into civilian areas... In Syria!
I accept that certain military types subjugate free thought and simply do as they are told, and to them, "INSTANT compliance is both expected and required", but ease off with the persecution complex and recognize and respect that others do actually think for themselves, and may actually express comments that do not support military atrocities against civilians!
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Cornwall
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I simply don't understand the western worlds lack of concern over the current situation in the middle east. Basically tough secular leaders who could maintain order are being removed and being replaced by Islamist political groups! In every single country in the region where the former dictator has been removed islamists in one form or another have taken over. I worry what the hell is going to happen to women in these nations, also those who do not follow islam! Egypt is my biggest worry, but Libya is concerning aswell. As for Syria better the devil we know!!!!
Lets look at Iraq, what was the point of it? Are people really better off than before? Has the west got a new loyal client state? I don't think so.
Once we leave Afghanistan does anyone think the Afghan government forces will hold out long?
There are many reports of the rebel groups in Libya and Syria having links with or actually being Al Quida. I thought they were supposed to be the enemy? Now the west is on their side? In 10 to 20 years possibly a lot less this is going to come back and bite the west big time! The whole region will be more radical than it is today. Probably yet another huge foreign policy blunder!!!!
Besides we have no damn money, neither UK or US, every pointless conflict we have bankrupts us that little bit more!!!
Lets look at Iraq, what was the point of it? Are people really better off than before? Has the west got a new loyal client state? I don't think so.
Once we leave Afghanistan does anyone think the Afghan government forces will hold out long?
There are many reports of the rebel groups in Libya and Syria having links with or actually being Al Quida. I thought they were supposed to be the enemy? Now the west is on their side? In 10 to 20 years possibly a lot less this is going to come back and bite the west big time! The whole region will be more radical than it is today. Probably yet another huge foreign policy blunder!!!!
Besides we have no damn money, neither UK or US, every pointless conflict we have bankrupts us that little bit more!!!