Posted on 12/07/2009 9:42:05 AM PST by pissant
RICHMOND, Va.—Two Navy SEALs are scheduled to be arraigned Monday in military court on charges that they mistreated an Iraqi suspect in the gory slayings of four U.S. contractors in Fallujah.
One of the SEALs is accused of punching the detainee after his September arrest, while the other is accused of lying to investigators. A third SEAL also accused of lying to investigators about the episode will be arraigned later.
All three men have men have received an outpouring of support from people who view them as heroes. A Facebook page created to support the SEALs had more than 45,000 members as of Friday, and a California congressman is spearheading a campaign to persuade Defense Secretary Robert Gates to intervene.
Petty Officers 2nd Class Matthew McCabe of Perrysburg, Ohio, and Jonathan Keefe of Yorktown, Va., and Petty Officer 1st Class Julio Huertas of Blue Island, Ill., face courts-martial at a date to be determined. Keefe's arraignment has been continued.
The men refused an administrative process known as "nonjudicial punishment" because they feared unfair treatment by military brass, said Neal Puckett, an attorney for McCabe.
"They felt they had already been determined to be guilty," said Puckett.
By refusing to accept the reprimand, the men could face a more serious penalty at court martial, which will be determined by a six-person military jury.
If the men are convicted, they could face up to a year in a military jail, a bad conduct discharge or loss of pay, said Puckett, a retired Marine Corps officer and judge advocate.
(Excerpt) Read more at mercurynews.com ...
BTT
“Yeah, tell it to the SS guards at Dachau that were lined up against a wall and shot by American troops during the camp’s liberation.”
I read that this happened when the American troops saw what the guards had done to the camp inmates. When they got done machine-gunning the guards, they handed pistols to the inmates so the inmates could finish off any survivors, which they were delighted to do. I don’t have a real problem with it because the camp guards were not combat troops (they were in fact despised by most German soldiers), they were in the business of shoving unarmed people into gas chambers.
There is also a story that charges were in fact filed against the soldiers. When the court martial papers reached General Patton’s desk, they allegedly fell off into his metal wastebasket where they accidentally caught fire when he forgot to blow out the match with which he had lit his pipe.
“You are probably so naive, that you believe that “all of the Japanese fought to the death” on the Pacific Islands, and that’s why live prisoners were so darn rare.”
Most did. It was common for Japanese to pretend to surrender so they could get close enough to our men to set off a grenade or bomb. When prisoners were taken, our men ordered them to strip to their underwear (from a distance) to make sure they had no concealed explosives.
“It’s an unfortunate situation all around, including the terrorist’s fat lip because it was much less than he probably deserved. But the basic question you have to ask yourself is: Do you think it’s okay for soldiers to break regulations and fail to follow orders because they feel like it?”
The SEALs are not charged with disobeying an order, they are charged with hitting a terrorist. The next SEALs who find one (e.g. Osama bin Laden) are likely to just kill him to make sure there is only one story, so their careers won’t be ruined for doing their jobs. I won’t blame them if they do.
Which is disobeying regulations and orders (there are usually standing orders to back up regulations). I think it shows the prosecution's intent that they didn't pile on. I don't know of any real evidence, so hopefully this boils down to trusting who is telling the truth. Who do you think a jury full of servicemembers is going to believe?
The next SEALs who find one (e.g. Osama bin Laden) are likely to just kill him to make sure there is only one story, so their careers won’t be ruined for doing their jobs. I won’t blame them if they do.
I don't have a problem with that. If the military does, then they need to rethink some of their rules.
That's the "party line," and I"m sure it happened a lot, just as sure as I am right from my father in law's mouth (he spent the entire month on Iwo from day one onward) that it was damn hard for the japs to surrender.....even when they tried.
But you keep up the party line, if it makes you feel better. I'll stick with my point: if we had fought WW2 with today's ROE and JAG lawyers, we'd have LOST.
Not...necessarily. If we fought with lawyers they way they're used today, yes. But get a little creative. The Romans used "catapults" to pitch really really pissed-off cats at their enemies, and plague ridden rats have been used against populations before, so the precedent is very well established. Whip up a few "lawyerpults" and Al Qaeda would be crying "uncle" in no time.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.