Canadian ex-soldier accused of murdering Taliban fighter states his case

I wish our gov't/society would spare us the "holier than thou" position we so often like to take. I wonder how many mercy killings happened during WW1 or WW2. Were they wrong also? Mercy killings that were done to our own from our own. In this case, some shit bag Taliban rag head was as good as dead, yet suffering still from his fatal wounds. Even his own countrymen didn't have the sympathy to do this guy right and not have him suffer any more. This trial is a joke of monumental proportions and it is no surprise that it's happening in Canada.

He was wrong before the law. Doesn't get much simpler than that.

But he was acquitted of the second-degree murder and attempted murder charges.

The only thing that stuck was the disgraceful conduct charge, but that was only so that they could kick him out of the military. Mind you, having known many career soldiers, that was probably the worst punishment you could give him.

I'm sure it was. This is one of those moral arguments that just didn't pass the legal sniff test.

As a civilian it really does not make much sense to punish the wee soldier for being
merciful when ass jacks like Bush and Cheney get to torture then walk away.
Just sayin'.

Well really, only he knows what his motivations were. The press called it a mercy killing, not the guy who did it. He did not explain his motivations.

This is one of those occasions where morality and legality really force you to make hard choices. The same thing happens when what is just butts heads with what is legal. It has a lot of similarity to Robert Latimer's case, and Latimer ended up behind bars for years.

Prosecuting soldiers for killing the enemy is absurd. Period.

I paused ...2...3 to figure out if was remotely worthwhile to engage in a debate about this statement but fortunately I suffered a rate form of commen sense that said not to waste my time.

I'll chalk it up to a Bartism and move on to discuss it with rational and thoughtful people instead.

I paused ...2...3 to figure out if was remotely worthwhile to engage in a debate about this statement but fortunately I suffered a rate form of commen sense that said not to waste my time.

I'll chalk it up to a Bartism and move on to discuss it with rational and thoughtful people instead.

Let me tell you a little something. If you really get on the bad side of a military shooter he won't go for a headshot on you, he'll put a frangible round through your back right about waist level and just to the right or left of your spine. Your intestines, liver, spleen, and etc, will explode through the front of your belly as a result.

You'll then be treated to as much as twenty minutes of utterly inhuman suffering before you inevitably die because, with your spine intact, you'll get to feel every raw nerve ending screaming in your brain.

In such a case it would be humane to deliver a coup de grâce yet it is 'illegal' for most militaries to do something like that.

But the gut shot? Yeah, that's perfectly fine.

In the coddled world of the politician such a thing as a mercy killing is distasteful but on the battlefield it is reality.

If your country doesn't have the nerve to go to war and then deal with the ramifications of that war then stay home. But don't order men into combat and expect them to behave like they're sitting around sipping wine along the Rideau Canal.

I must admit that the very fine line of mercy killing employed by the extremist right is such a convenient fall back position.

Okay to mercy kill Taliban

Not okay to mercy kill terminal cancer sufferer.

Me thinks the thin facade of mercy killing that Taliban dude is simply that - a thin facade. Truth is that it really comes down to the desire to kill the bad guy......all of the bad guys irrespective of rule of law.

It would be nice for an admission of the truth but I know it won't happen.

So what? That's exactly what they do to us. Exactly how many NATO troops are in a Taliban POW camp? Remind me again of all the stories of Taliban being so nice to injured NATO troops?

Hmmm?

Truth be told, I'm damned happy you weren't around for WW2 or you'd have been out protesting on how awful the US was to the poor Japanese soldiers.

Oops out of rational rebuttals already!


Interesting leap. Don't hurt yourself doing that.

Instead of saying, "F*ck you", (as that would be crass) let me just respond with this:



If you can't understand this then please, please stay out of your country's military as in combat you'd be about as useful as tits on a bull.