Skip to comments.Charges Against Snipers Stir Debate on 'Baiting'
Posted on 09/27/2007 5:19:27 AM PDT by xzins
Spec. Jorge Sandoval lay face down in the foot-high grass, staring through his sniper rifle scope at the Iraqi man holding a rusted sickle. The man had crouched down, only his head was visible. Sandoval's spotter, Staff. Sgt. Michael Hensley, relayed the order to kill.
On April 27, in dangerous terrain south of Baghdad, Sandoval pulled the trigger to fire a bullet hundreds of yards into the man's skull, killing him instantly. Moments earlier, the man, according to testimony and court documents, had been fleeing an attack on U.S. soldiers and was holding the sickle to masquerade as a farmer. After killing him, Sandoval and Hensley allegedly placed a spool of wire -- commonly used to make bombs -- on the man's body to ensure the shooting would not be questioned.
Sandoval's court-martial on premeditated murder charges for this killing is scheduled to begin today in Baghdad. As he and two other snipers face charges of killing Iraqis, legal experts are debating how large a role a classified program of "baiting" their targets played in the cases. The soldiers in the unit had the spool of wire, defense attorneys said, only because the Army's secretive Asymmetric Warfare Group had given it to them -- along with other items, such as plastic explosives and AK-47 rounds -- so the snipers could boost the number of suspected insurgents they killed by shooting whoever picked up the materials.
However, some soldiers serving in Iraq said that the program and the subsequent murder charges have caused them to rethink pulling the trigger in the field out of concern that they could be charged with crimes for doing so....make a split-second decision ...the man and possibly face scrutiny, or let him go and possibly put...service members in jeopardy in the future.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
American heroes are being set up, taken to other
countries for prosecutions like this, and Pres.Bush is
helping those that persecute them and set them up,
like he helps those that are jailing border patrol agents.
New article up, Red.
Looks like it was a righteous shooting no matter how you look at it. They’d just witnessed the guy being an insurgent.
They’re accused of planting the wire. Maybe the guy picked it up. Maybe the guy already had it. Does the prosecution have the wire???
Amazing, lawyers must be following these guys into combat.....wait, these military prosecutors wouldnt know combat if it came in the front door. They sit in safe areas, far from the reality of combat and wait for the opportunity to slam some GI for doing his job.
Apparently these scum prosecutors have decided our guys are the enemy.
The Leftist on the other side of my office cubical wall yesterday was discussing this with his cube mate. He was spewing filth Im sure he heard on AirAmerica on his drive in to work, saying that Our soldiers are shooting anyone going after the bait, innocent or not, even women and children.
I can tell you what I really wanted to do at that moment but I need my job.
war grounds aren’t court rooms
kill the enemy no matter what it takes, that should include those within too
Something fishy here...something relevant isn’t being reported.
Just because someone picked up a curious-looking thing doesn’t make them a valid target ... and our boys know that.
Hopefully, one day, someone will bring these prosecutors to justice.
Obviously the ‘columnists’ don’t know jack about what went down and what it is to be on the ground there. Then again in my view, they’re not in any position to even write a sentence on it... period.
My question is, where’s the guys backup? FUBAR
You missed the above. He was shot because he was an insurgent.
IF the troops placed wire on him, then he was not shot because he was picking anything up.
They were TRYING to keep from getting legally charged for doing their job....sniping.
If this isn't a fine catch 22 we've got the troops in, I've never heard of a better one.
Do your job legitimately..and you get charged. Do your job legitimately and try to cover yourself...and you get charged.
Answer: don't do your flippin' job.
The moment I saw the JAG override the Predator drivers who had Mullah Omar in the reticle, I knew we were not serious about prosecuting the war - but they're damn sure serious about prosecuting our troops.
Never mind that the charges are completely untrue. Let us pretend that they are true and then debate the policy...
They're going to get our guys killed, they're going to destroy morale, and they're going to prevent independent thinking.
These prosecutions are going to do as much to hurt our troops as have the failure to report the successes in Iraq.
It’s not right to teach a kid to fight a certain way and then prosecute him for doing exactly that.
And then try to charge him with murder and the military hide behind a “classified” program that you don’t want revealed!!!
That is worse than “not having your brother’s back.” That is BETRAYAL! Here he is trusting you and the info you give him, and you turn around and stab him in the back with murder charges.
Someone in this is totally contemptible and it is not the soldiers in question.
We cannot afford to have our troops questioning whether or not their actions will lead to legal ramifications. This is NOT the way to conduct war. As soon as the soldier/sailor/airman stops for a split second to wonder if the next action he/she takes to kill an enemy combatant, one or more of the good guys will be killed by the enemy. This is what the moonbat left wingers want. If we let them succeed, even after the fact by changing the rules of the war after the battle has been won, we may as well not have a military. The consequences of that should be obvious to us all. This is an extremely dangerous situation and our future depends on it.
Which has, of course, been the plan all along.