Navy SEALs Face Assault Charges for Capturing Most-Wanted Terrorist

the makeout hobo · 11-26-09, 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrVicchio

In a war zone, taking into custody a high value target, who resists...

And he gets a bloody lip.

AND YOU PEOPLE ARE WORRIED ABOUT HIS FREAKING RIGHTS???

Do you know what this animal did to 4 Americans and why he was targeted?

DO YOU HAVE A CLUE THE PAIN HE INFLICTED?

And you're worried about his freaking lip?

DO YOU EVEN CARE ABOUT HOW WEAK WE LOOK?

Cause the rest of the world, especially our enemies, are laughing at us.

Was it in a warzone? I thought it was after he was in detention. If not, it probably doesn't violate anything, and as of such I don't care. And yes I care about his frickin' rights, because I care about everyone's rights. It's just the kind of person I am. And more importantly, I believe in most cases you follow the rules you've agreed to follow. Two wrongs don't make a right, didn't your mother ever tell you that?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamesrage

Claims made by terrorist should never trump those made by our service men and women. I do not know about you but I prefer to take the word of our service mem and women instead of the word of terrorist. And even if they did punch the scumbag they still shouldn't be punished for it.

Why shouldn't they be punished for punching him, if it violates the UCMJ?

Keep in mind I'm not saying we should believe the terrorist over the service men, but if it does come out in court of law that they're guilty, they should be punished accordingly.

Scorpion89 · 11-26-09, 11:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Whip Comes Down

Violations of the UCMJ are not tried in civilian courts, boo.

Wrong Junior I suggest you go find yourself another Law degree from the closest Crackerbox you can find.

Scorpion89 · 11-26-09, 11:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Whip Comes Down

Where did you flunk out of law school?

Same question can be ask of you Junior.

Tashah · 11-26-09, 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redress

Do you mean why is the military not talking about the case? They should not until it is resolved.

But they already have. The military stated... blah, blah, and blah.

Why stop at the three blah's?

Why not either go with no blah's (ignorance is bliss), or offer all the blah's (ah yes, it all perfect makes sense now)?

That's what I mean by doing this half-assed. They released just enough information to piss folks off, but not enough information to enlighten anyone.

Redress · 11-26-09, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tashah

But they already have. The military stated... blah, blah, and blah.

Why stop at the three blah's?

Why not either go with no blah's (ignorance is bliss), or offer all the blah's (ah yes, it all perfect makes sense now)?

That's what I mean by doing this half-assed. They released just enough information to piss folks off, but not enough information to enlighten anyone.

Quick obvious caveat: I am not a lawyer.

I think what it looks like is the SOC spokewoman got asked, and answered in the most general way.

Quote:

Lt. Col. Holly Silkman, spokeswoman for the special operations component of U.S. Central Command, confirmed Tuesday to FoxNews.com that three SEALs have been charged in connection with the capture of a detainee. She said their court martial is scheduled for January.

So one of the Seals, or their family or friends I suspect went to FOX with the story, and when FOX checked with SOC, they got a yes, we have 3 guys charged in connection with...I really wish we had things like the actual question(s) she was asked, and her actual answers. That is the thing that is so frustrating about this whole thing, we lack so many details.

earthworm · 11-26-09, 12:30 PM

I suspect that someone is deliberately withholding the details and preventing enlightenment.
Who?

Objective Voice · 11-26-09, 11:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arch Enemy

Ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Is there some clause that Mass Murderers are not allowed to be punched in the facial structure?

Yeah. It's called the Geneva Convention. (You don't have to like it. I sure don't. But 'dem be the rules as far as our military is concerned on how to treat prisoners.)

MrVicchio · 11-26-09, 11:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Objective Voice

Yeah. It's called the Geneva Convention. (You don't have to like it. I sure don't. But 'dem be the rules as far as our military is concerned on how to treat prisoners.)

You do know that Terrorist are not covered by the GC right?

Why do people give a rats ass about the rights of terrorist? I prefer this method of dealing with scum bags on the field of battle (BTW it was completely legal, sadly the bleeding hearts of the world condemned the Gen. Shame really)

Kali · 11-26-09, 11:59 PM

This was most talked about today during Turkey Dinner and all of us are outraged! We found common ground today while doing the political talks cause we all think this is just NUTS!

Objective Voice · 11-27-09, 12:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar

No, I don't think so. In fact, the command would have felt that offering NJP was a way to slap the wrists and avoid the stink. Now they got the stink.

If the courts martial convicts, it's political hay with the conservatives in Congress and the Americans.

If the men are acquitted, the Messiah and his cronies will seek to wreck the careers of the officers sitting in judgement.

So they're going to be convicted in all likelihood. What the hell, the time-honored tradition in the military is screw the enlistees. This isn't going to be any different.

I agreed with you up until that bit about "the Messiah" and the preceived conviction.

Why does a conviction mean instant retribution to the officers and/or non-commissioned officers of the jury? Couldn't the Obama Administration simply commend the military judicial system for working as it was intended? And it's very possible that these soldiers could/will go free.

The only outcome we can all be sure of is if there is a conviction, even one, the Republican Party will have a field day with it and will certainly blame the Obama Administration despite the Iraq War leading up to making this convicted terrorist public enemy #1 happened under GW Bush's watch.

11-26-09, 12:30 PM	#106
earthworm Professor Join Date: Dec 2005 Last Seen: Yesterday 11:02 PM Location: York Haven Posts: 1,572 Thanks: 481 Thanked 172 Times in 137 Posts Lean: Independent Gender:	Re: Navy SEALs Face Assault Charges for Capturing Most-Wanted Terrorist I suspect that someone is deliberately withholding the details and preventing enlightenment. Who?

11-26-09, 11:59 PM	#109
Kali Saints:Winners of SB XLIV Join Date: Mar 2008 Last Seen: Today 12:42 AM Posts: 5,756 Thanks: 1,003 Thanked 504 Times in 395 Posts Lean: Very Liberal	Re: Navy SEALs Face Assault Charges for Capturing Most-Wanted Terrorist This was most talked about today during Turkey Dinner and all of us are outraged! We found common ground today while doing the political talks cause we all think this is just NUTS!
	__________________ ~Following My Own Flow~

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

The Following User Says Thank You to Redress For This Useful Post:
Tashah

The Following User Says Thank You to Objective Voice For This Useful Post:
the makeout hobo