Video shows Australian SAS soldier shooting and killing unarmed man at close range in Afghanistan

Clearly you are not familiar with the Marcus Lutrell story, they made a decision not to kill and died... well everyone except him. War does not give you easy choices, the only easy thing is for people like you to sit in your comfortable armchairs online and judge an incident they didn't witness, weren't in attendance of, don't understand the circumstances and clearly do not have any understanding of the violence that surround these soldiers. You also ignore hundreds of thousands of civilians killed by UN peacekeepers, thousands killed in Syria by Russia, Turkey, Syrian Army, and the US in bombings to wipe out ISIS only to single this soldier out.... Why is that? What is your purpose or agenda for doing this?

Also I said again and again in this thread, the situation must be dealt with internally, this is not ignoring the incident or not holding someone accountable. Why would you misrepresent what I said?

 

Again why misrepresent what I said... please point to the post where I said the video is fake. How is classified material fake?

Let's start there

 

People like me? I'm not a combat vet - do you claim such experience?

However, I have served in the US Army: four years active duty. What is your military service experience?

 

I grew up in an environment of civil war, which gives me an understanding of the deceptiveness that violence can possess. It doesn't have to look dangerous to be dangerous.

ps I'll mention that in no way am I obligated to explain myself to you. Because you are just like me simply another voice on the internet. we merely have opposite views

 

Your words: "They were not caught on film." So if they were not caught on film and I watched a film showing an execution what are you trying to say other than the video was fake?

 

They were not caught on film, it was not accidental recording, the footage was stolen... clearly from archives. This is not someone on Twitter who filmed someone standing around the corner.... IT IS CLASSIFIED MATERIALS STOLEN... from the soldiers own headcam.

is that clear enough

 

One guy plus video evidence.

 

We will have to agree to disagree then that matters of war and peace are not open to public discussion. Please correct me if I've quoted you out of context.

 

2 Black Hawks leading a team aren't tracking this guy because he is innocent, hapless, posing zero threat, submissive, assumed to be unarmed or because he is brown.

The presenter says the man has "what appears to be a set of red prayer beads" "no weapon or radio CAN BE SEEN" then oh guess what? It's edited.

A 2 minute edited clip from an operation that could have been hours, days or months in the making is not an accurate recreation of the operation at hand. Did he have a set of red prayer beads or did he have a detonator. Did he have something under his robes? He WAS a bomb maker after all.

Armchair critics calling for the SAS to be disbanded should remain in their armchairs and stick to crosswords.

 

Really, your profile lists your residence as Melbourne. What civil war is it that you've survived?

If we are not obligated to explain our positions on this forum, of what value is it? I will honestly explain who I am and why I think what I think and I am willing to change my opinion about anything given a sufficiently convincing argument.

 

The Melbourne Festival

 

Bob Hawke who was PM the leftists darling even lashed out at the ABC (the Australian leftist Bible) for their biased coverage of war and their anti government and anti-Americanism.

https://ipa.org.au/wp-content/uploads/archive/IPABackgrounder16-1.pdf

 

ok, that is sweet....

 

Strawman fallacy.

He shot an unarmed man that had been mauled by a dog. Rules of engagement notwithstanding, what evidence was there that the guy killed was an enemy vs. some poor bastard walking in a field near where he lived. I guess if he runs he's an enemy. If he doesn't run he's a well disciplined enemy.

Don't know about Australia, but US counter insurgency doctrine strives to obtain the support of local populations. Following this doctrine does not make one a bleeding heart.

 

ironically, your rebuttal to my post also qualifies as strawman fallacy...

wierd, isn't it...

 

Appreciate the sense of humor which is often lacking in these discussions.

 

Eh, you could tell who liked us and who didn't. The people in Nauzad liked us.

 

The solution is to have only people with your beliefs in the military. This incident shows that the people who enlisted, like the soldier in question, were idiots for doing so.

 

What are my beliefs that you find so disturbing?

 

The problem is your putting words in my mouth.
1. I was not there i don't know the whole story.
2. I am content to wait for the inquiry to finish before i make a judgement.
3. If the inquiry comes back as a not justified killing throw the book at them like i said before

How are any of these bad?

America has sent folks in uniforms all over the world to fight against many different types of people, right or wrong we have, do, and will in the future. In such instances , if it helps our troops get through those ordeals to call their enemies by some derogatory term i am all for that. And it's been proven by historical example to not have any lasting meaning. History is full of accounts of soldiers making friends with people they once called by a derogatory name..
If you have a problem with that type of "racism" i don't really care history debunks you..

 

Huh? First, you don't "allow escape" to one upon whom you have just dropped enough ordinance to actually alter the appearance of the mountain in which he hid, for the purpose of killing him into a million pieces. Second, of course facts support that our being there is part of the war on terrorism. If they allied with terrorists once, they'll do it again. Consequently, third, it seems reasonable that the negotiated settlement will include assurances that there will be no future alliances between the Taliban and terrorists.

 

Who leaked it? Who is the whistle blower?

Is there context that would justify the killing?

 

You seem to believe that Soldiers shouldn't kill the enemy.

 

It is obvious that you have never seen examples of American propaganda against the Nazis and Japanese during WWII. Normal people have to be incited to display hatred toward people in order to have the nerve to kill them. That is true for all humans.

 

I do not know who leaked it. I thought it was the bloke in Signals but I misread the Article. I do not know the context.