[EyeBrock]

This guy was charged well before any prorogue in a tea-cup.

Linking the two events is a stretch.

This isn't about alleged torture or handing Taliban prisoners over to the Afghans.
It's about alleged very serious misconduct and an alleged murder. Making it a partisan issue and linking it to the government's prorogue is facile.

[andyt]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

This isn't about alleged torture or handing Taliban prisoners over to the Afghans.
It's about alleged very serious misconduct and an alleged murder. Making it a partisan issue and linking it to the government's prorogue is facile.

I agree, which is why I called you on it when you were making it a partisan issue. The only link I was making was that they were not acting true to form on this matter, actually letting the whole thing go ahead.

[EyeBrock]

I wasn't making it a partisan issue. You need to be around a bit longer before you start making these assertions credible.
Maybe if you got to know the posters on here better you wouldn’t be taking things in a vein they were not meant in?

Just a suggestion.

[poquas]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

Ah, and so rushes on the lynch-mob.

Nice to see you have such an open mind. Conservative supporter that hates the Tories.

Now you support our armed forces but they are guilty before they have even been tried. They just go "around the world where actions without regard to the rule of law is just fine."

Your unbiased support for the Tories and the Canadian Forces is truly appreciated.

Wow! Your idiocy and tribalism is almost too profound for words.

$1:

Conservative supporter that hates the Tories.

That would be after 40 years I am now FORMER supporter, however in your narrow minded little world that’s not allowed. It’s frightening how someone is so overwhelmingly childishly dependent on identifying themselves by the political party they support. Canada needs some level of deity for you to pledge you allegiance to? You need help.

$1:

Your unbiased support for the Tories and the Canadian Forces is truly appreciated.

You wouldn’t know “unbiased” if it bit you in the ass. I don’t believe in blind, unquestioning support without any rational to ANY entity. Your attitude of blind allegiance to the forces and politics displays a dangerous level of wilful ignorance or blatant stupidity. Sometime politicians are jerks even if they’re Conservative, and sometimes soldiers break laws they have to answer for. Again, you need help.

[EyeBrock]

Thanks for the internet psyc appraisal. But we've seen all this bluster before.

It took you a while to come back after your last ban. We'll see how long it is until your next ban.

[poquas]

Good comeback.

Care to address the topic now?

[EyeBrock]

Not with you.

[poquas]

Then do us all a favour and mark me as a foe in your profile. That way I won't have to deal with your infantile comments.

[EyeBrock]

Nah. I'll do what I want within the rules of the forum.

I don't even have to call you names or insult you to get you to do the same.

Feel free to take your own advice though.

[putz]

andyt andyt:

putz putz:

Personally, as an enemy fighter, if he wants to meet Allah let him go screaming in agony the entire way. No need to help him along.

So you want Samrau punished because he didn't prolong the Talib's suffering?

IF he's found guilty I would want to see him punished because he broke the law. Now for all you people saying no body no crime.. obviously somebody saw something, somebody filed a report and the NIS found enough for the go ahead for charges and a trial. Trust me the last thing I want to see is a fellow comrade in arms becoming a scape goat. BUT if he did something wrong then he deserves what happens.

[Gunnair]

gonavy47 gonavy47:

Scapegoat. Hearsay evidence only. How can there be a conviction?

$1:

The document says an assault rifle was taken from the wounded man before Semrau was allegedly seen firing his rifle at him. Two shots were heard.

Sounds like more than hearsay.

[Gunnair]

martin14 martin14:

gonavy47 gonavy47:

Scapegoat. Hearsay evidence only. How can there be a conviction?

I agree, there is something seriously wrong with this,

and someone is being hung out to dry for no reason.

I can tell you, with experience in dealing with AJAG, that one does not go to court martial based on 'hearsay'. There has to be a very reasonable chance of conviction.

[Gunnair]

andyt andyt:

putz putz:

Personally, as an enemy fighter, if he wants to meet Allah let him go screaming in agony the entire way. No need to help him along.

So you want Samrau punished because he didn't prolong the Talib's suffering?

Trial ain't over. If he did nothing, he walks, if he killed him, he should be punished.

Pass it through the 'how would I react if a Taliban did the same?' litmus test and tell me what you think.

[Gunnair]

PENATRATOR PENATRATOR:

Not so sure the "shot while escaping" defense would work unless this were the German Army circa 1943, ROE's being what they are and all!

Bang on. I won't sit here and say what your ROE is, but most of my ROE frowns rather heavily on shooting someone running away from me.

[Tricks]

What's the SOP for wounded enemy combatants? Leave them? Take them with you as prisoner?