Soldiers Who Urinated On Corpses, Burned Qurans Will Not Be Criminally Prosecuted

reply to post by daaskapital


I'll agree with you about the Koran being their life over there. And I've no issue with that. I've always felt to each their own. You do your thing,I do mine.Don't bother me kinda thing,ya know? But you and I both know this wouldn't have been reported had it been any other nationality of soldiers that did it.Okay,may have been reported,but certainly wouldn't have been big news as It doesn't make for good press unless involves Americans. AMERICA IS THE DEVIL LOOK WHAT THEY DID ! But it's okay for them to burn our flag,bibles,etc. And if you say that doesn't happen you're a hypocrite.

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by babloyi
So your argument is that since the Taliban are so vile, the US can be vile too? Kinda throws the idea of them having the moral high ground out the window.

Taliban behead 17 caught dancing to music at party

I personally think that when US soldiers kill Taliban they should dance on their bodies.

edit on 28-8-2012 by ollncasino because: (no reason given)

Don't bother.According to most here,the US is the only ones who do any harm to anyone else on Earth!

Wake up dude,where have you been ?

Originally posted by MaximosPoena

Originally posted by mr-lizard
These men should be stripped of all ranks

Acceptable.

and prosecuted

Setting the morality and poor judgement aside, prosecute them on what charges exactly?

The charge of desecration of human corpse comes to mind, but what level of crime is it? If its a misdemeanor, then a court martial will result in them having a Federal (Felony) Conviction and would be considered extreme. While it is a felony in some states from what I can tell, it's a misdemeanor in others. So to get around it, the military reserves Court Martials for more serious charges and I think all branches use the Article 15 as a non judicial punishment which isn't as sever on ones record. They have other forms of punishment that they can dole out as well. I don't think anyone said these guys were getting off scott free. They're just not being hit with criminal charges that will screw up the rest of their lives.

Good . They shouldn't be charged with anything.

Firstly, the pissing on corpse's was distasteful, but it wasnt criminal.
These soliders should have been reprimanded for their actions, but in no way should they be criminally charged.

And Secondly, No One should ever be criminally charged for burning a religious book that they dont like or disagree with.
Im sure muslims have burnt their fair share of bibles too.

Im sick and tired of hearing about any and all religious and extremists groups whinging over the burning and desecration of their ficticious book of writing's and ranting's. (Bible/Koran, ect)
Its just a ****ing book...............
Get over it...................

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger
reply to post by wash777

 

i'm sure you'll be singing a different tune
when it's your corpse they piss on

Who? US Marines? Why would they?

As for the enemy, well they have absolutely no respect for their prisoners.. so I fail to get your point.

Originally posted by babloyi
So your argument is that since the Taliban are so vile, the US can be vile too? Kinda throws the idea of them having the moral high ground out the window.

No. Seems to me that his argument was to counter the statement "I guess you would be OK with soldiers doing this to you then."

Since it is a fact that they do far worse, the statement is simply an attempt to turn the argument around, and it failed miserably. The people they are fighting do far worse.

Ignoring all of that however, to further wedge in support for the taliban so overtly expressed on ATS, you go and try and use the moral high ground spin on it.

reply to post by winofiend

As for the enemy, well they have absolutely no respect for their prisoners.. so I fail to get your point.

You'd be surprised.

reply to post by winofiend

Originally posted by winofiend
No. Seems to me that his argument was to counter the statement "I guess you would be OK with soldiers doing this to you then."

Since it is a fact that they do far worse, the statement is simply an attempt to turn the argument around, and it failed miserably. The people they are fighting do far worse.

Ignoring all of that however, to further wedge in support for the taliban so overtly expressed on ATS, you go and try and use the moral high ground spin on it.

I'm really not quite sure what you are going on about. Lets recap.
Someone said "It is good that the soldiers were not prosecuted for this (urinating on corpses), because "they were under the pressures of war"
Someone asked in reply "Would you feel the same if this had happened to you instead of halfway across the world?"
to which ollcasino replied "LEFT WING BLAH BLAH! How dare you defend the Taliban, this is a list of all the bad things they did!"

Which is why I asked him "So you are saying it is okay for US soldiers to do bad things because the other side does worse things?"

It is a perfectly valid extension of the argument. And I didn't bring the moral high ground spin on it. Ollcasino brought that up by trying to stick in a list of bad stuff the Taliban did as a justification for urinating on corpses and burning Qurans (i.e. it is okay for the US to do those things, because the Taliban did these things).

Why would you even care about soldiers urinating on the corpses of the most vile, disrespectful, evil, etc. people on this world? As people above me have posted, the Taliban do much, much worse than anyone else.
Why shouldn't they get some of it back?

I bet if it was bankers or the Illuminati everyone would be cheering.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n


Well, that's because they're all individual. Just like us.

While I don't know the particulars of the case I think that Non-judicial punishment is appropriate under the UCMJ.

The only thing I can find to charge them with would be:

Article 92 (Failure to obey an order or regulation) - This would be because there is a policy memo in theater about mutilating, photographing, or desecrating the enemy dead. The Soldiers failed to follow that policy.

Article 134 (General Article) - This the catch all article that covers acts which are prejudicial to good order and discipline and of a nature to bring discredit on the service.

They didn't break a law they failed to follow military policy which is like a person who works for IBM not adhering to the employee handbook. Not criminal acts. Therefore they are being punished accordingly by the military within the military system of administrative punishment.

The military did not disclose precise punishments for the troops but Army and Marine Corps spokesmen said they fell into a category that includes administrative sanctions, like a reduction in rank or forfeiture of pay.

www.huffingtonpost.com...

You are all free to look in the Manual for Courts Martial (2012) to see if you can find a criminal violation.

Even of the Soldiers are being offered non-judicial punishment they have the right to a Court Martial should they so choose.

Also, for those who are not military or who never have been receipt of an Article 15 is a career ender unless one is a very junior soldier. An NCO or Officer who receives an Article 15 will never be promoted or allowed to reenlist. So unless the Soldiers are Privates their careers are over but they will not have a criminal record because - they didn't break the law.

Originally posted by babloyi

So your argument is that since the Taliban are so vile, the US can be vile too? Kinda throws the idea of them having the moral high ground out the window.

Is it possible to lose the moral high ground to people who execute people for dancing, kill children for laughing at them and flog and execute pregnant women for adultery?

Taliban behead 17 caught dancing to music at party

The Taliban killed eight boys who laughed at soldiers

Taliban Flog, Execute Pregnant Woman in Afghanistan

Look, I know that because you are a Muslim that you feel that you have a duty to defend everything Islamic, but defending the honour of dead Taliban really is beyond the pale. Those people are murdering religious fanatics.

reply to post by ollncasino

Hahahaha...wow, we really are in 1984 now. Black is white, war is peace, right is wrong.

Originally posted by ollncasino
...defending the honour of dead Taliban really is beyond the pale

Look, I'm a bit worried that I have to explain this to you, but desecrating corpses is what is "beyond the pale".
I'm a bit worried I have to explain this to you, but a person being a "murdering religious fanatics" (although to point out, there is absolutely no proof that those corpses ever were...unless your sentence structure meant that the US army was murdering religious fanatics...not really clear), ISN'T an excuse to justify urinating on someone's corpse.


I suppose basic human dignity has flown out the window in your eternal quest to bang on Islam
Perhaps I need to explain this more clearly, as there obviously seems to be some skewed morality going on here.

No matter how vile the actions of the Taliban (or of those specific bodies)- they may have caused another holocaust, they may have murdered babies Old Testament style, they may have eaten all your puppies- THAT DOESN'T MAKE URINATING ON THEIR CORPSES OKAY.

reply to post by ollncasino

Is it possible to lose the moral high ground to people who execute people for dancing, kill children for laughing at them and flog and execute pregnant women for adultery?

Actually, yes.

The moral high ground flies out of the window when soldiers like Robert Bales (killed 16 unarmed Afghan civilians, 9 of whom were kids) are allowed to go scot free.
No wait, the poor chap had PTSD.... not his fault at all.

It appears that the side perceived as having a "moral high ground" are the EXACT SAME as the enemy.

So they burned a Kuran/Qur'an - thats a bit "so what" really and sure aint a crime in the western world, and when levelled with some muslims burning effigies, flags and bibles etc then it all seems even stevens.

Now pissing on corpses does sound rather bad at first, but in all fairness this happened after a firefight (i assume) and adrenaline is a funny old thing, as is being glad to have survived. The issue with the pissing is being caught or observed - a bit of internal discipline seems about right for this, beast them a few times, maybe demote them for sheer carelessness and stupidity (a liability in a war zone), but criminal charges just sounds like hand-wringing to me.

lol so when/if martial law gets declared in the usa

i want to hear NO complaints from americans

when american soldiers piss, crap, and hump the corpses of their loved ones

because doing all that is OK and acceptable.

Once again, why are such anti-religion ATS members suddenly so defensive and supportive when it comes to extreme Islam? What the hell do any of you atheists care if a book was pissed on? Artists in America regularly piss on Christian symbols and call it art, without your outrage.

Originally posted by wash777
reply to post by mr-lizard

 

I'm an American, thank God. We don't put up with that sort of thing.

No you just set a terrible example for the rest of the world.

No wonder America is going down the drain.

reply to post by ollncasino


So because your enemies engage in barbaric acts, that makes it fine for your soldiers to do exactly the same?

-- Are you so ignorant and blind to not understand that respecting the dead is what elevates you beyond your enemy?

But then again, I'd never really consider an American soldier much more than a Taliban. Both equally as bad as each other. The only difference is that the Taliban use Ak47's and knives, and the Americans use drones and bombs.

Both pathetic. Don't ever accuse me of using pro-taliban spin.

I'm simply saying that a dead body - whether that be an allied soldier or a taliban corpse does NOT need to be desecrated.

Click here for more information.