• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Brutal-the Killer of 16 is from a nearby Town

US soldiers rarely 'get the max' for crimes committed overseas in a combat zone. Remember My lai, LT William Calley? How about the Stryker Bde 'kill team'? The Sqd Ldr who ran the team and killed 3 unarmed civilians, collecting body parts along the way, got life WITH the chance of parole in 10 years. That would be unheard of if SSG Calvin Gibbs had murdered 3 American civilians and kept body parts.

As far as not flying Afghans in for the trial or SSG Bales having some right to confront his accusers, remember it is a Military trial. Secondly there was a buttload of expended brass recovered and an assigned weapon he surrendered at the gate. Wont take too much to convince a tribunal of military men Bales is guilty.

But then again if an NCO who was fingered by witnesses gets life with the chance of parole who knows what another one gets with no US serviceman as witness.
 
The guy is already claiming he can't remember the killings.
 
The guy is already claiming he can't remember the killings.
He doesn't have to. They've got him on film leaving the base and returning to the base. They've got his weapon. They've got expended rounds from the scene of the massacre. They've got his confession. All his defense team has left is claiming he was mentally insane during the incident. That's not going to go over well in a courts martial. Military folk tend to frown on "the devil made me do it" defense.
 
Last edited:
He doesn't have to. They've got him on film leaving the base and returning to the base. They've got his weapon. They've got expended rounds from the scene of the massacre. They've got his confession. All his defense team has left is claiming he was mentally insane during the incident. That's not going to go over well in a courts marshal. Military folk tend to frown on "the devil made me do it" defense.

He's saying it to strengthen his case. The poor beast.
 
Possibly a crime in which there is tangible evidence that he did it?

I thought we were working on the assumption that he was convicted 'beyond reasonable doubt'. So I repeat, what would he have had to have done to receive the maximum sentence?
 
I thought we were working on the assumption that he was convicted 'beyond reasonable doubt'. So I repeat, what would he have had to have done to receive the maximum sentence?

Kill Americans... :shrug:
 
Kill Americans... :shrug:

Now someone who has been on the other side in Afghanistan has allegedly killed Jewish children it will all, doubtless be cancelled out, as the extreme-rightist explain that it is the nature of war, just as the 123 children killed by the Palestine Reistance so clearly justify the 2,000-odd Christian and Muslim children killed over the last ten years by the zionists gunmen. It's a matter of POWER, you see.
 
This man should never have been sent back over there. Whoever sent him back is responsible.
 
Absolute nonsense. He is responsible. He pulled the trigger. He killed babies and women. He apparently set some of them on fire. This constant litany of excuses and 'blame the other guy/society/a poor home life/whoever sent him there is just crap.
 
Absolute nonsense. He is responsible. He pulled the trigger. He killed babies and women. He apparently set some of them on fire. This constant litany of excuses and 'blame the other guy/society/a poor home life/whoever sent him there is just crap.

It's not crap, but I think, basically, it has to be the way we see these things. The US is racist, capitalist and irresponsible, and it uses (as do may countries) poor and not-very-bright people as tools to get profit for the very rich, but, when you come down to it, this is always so nowadays. My Grandfather went through the First War, at least from 1915, in the trenches. but he - though he turned into a miserable old burgher - never actually murdered anyone, especially children. We know who is ultimately responsible, but we can't prosecute them. Meanwhile, we remain responsible at least for our own actions, or everything breaks down in chaos.
 
Absolute nonsense. He is responsible. He pulled the trigger. He killed babies and women. He apparently set some of them on fire. This constant litany of excuses and 'blame the other guy/society/a poor home life/whoever sent him there is just crap.
He did make a choice, but I have the same opinion with this case that I do with most cases of extreme violence including that of our enemies. My opinion is that choice alone does not explain such violent actions. Yes, he made a choice to kill all of those innocent people. However, every choice has causes. His deployments, what he saw on those deployments, his brain surgery and any underlying mental health problems might have and likely did contribute to this. Whether you like it or not, choices are impacted, and perhaps determined, by things outside of our control.

I do, however, agree with you that using the explanation and understanding of those things to excuse his behavior or feel overwhelmingly bad for him is wrongheaded. To be honest, some of the comments that express so much sympathy towards him without even a mention of the people he killed make me feel a bit sick even though I consider the loss of his free life in addition to the effect this will have on his family to be pretty sad.

However, none of this means that the things people have talked about from multiple deployments to mental health aren't valid and important explanations for his behavior. It's true that most soldiers don't go on these rampages which is why Bales' behavior should not be excused or written off as "too many deployments", but it's still important to acknowledge whatever factors did influence his decision so that we can eliminate them and prevent future events like this from happening.
 
Last edited:
I don't care why he made the choice. He made it. He's responsible. To rationalize his actions based on deployments or what he saw or anything else is an insult to every soldier who's gone through what he went through and probably worse and didn't resort to baby-killing as his stress reliever.

And as for the 'evil capitalistic society' using him to do its dirty work, just more crap and BS. And another excuse for a little America bashing.
 
I don't care why he made the choice. He made it. He's responsible. To rationalize his actions based on deployments or what he saw or anything else is an insult to every soldier who's gone through what he went through and probably worse and didn't resort to baby-killing as his stress reliever.

And as for the 'evil capitalistic society' using him to do its dirty work, just more crap and BS. And another excuse for a little America bashing.
I'm not rationalizing his actions. In fact, I did the exact opposite so you maybe you can stop being reactionary and actually read what I said.

I'm saying that actions are caused partially by things outside of our control. If his deployments or a mental disorder or anything else contributed to his choices, then don't you think we should acknowledge that in order to prevent stuff like this from happening in the future?
 
Gosh, and to think we fought World War II with guys only being deployed once. Of course it lasted until the end of the war.

No more excuses. No more 'blame somebody/something else.
 
Gosh, and to think we fought World War II with guys only being deployed once. Of course it lasted until the end of the war.

No more excuses. No more 'blame somebody/something else.

I have a question my friend...

Are there any take aways from this relative to deployments? Or is it simply this guy going ape ****.
 
It's surprising that more soldiers don't snap. I know they do, but killing 16, including children, that's terrible. He'd been drinking? How much drinking is allowed at combat bases, anyway? And, yes being lied to by the military and told he was on his way home...and then "oh, we changed your orders." That should not be legal, although I know they pull that crap with soldiers all the time. He was ultimately responsible, but a lot of factors added up to his snapping and they all have to be considered before his sentencing.
 
Gosh, and to think we fought World War II with guys only being deployed once. Of course it lasted until the end of the war.

No more excuses. No more 'blame somebody/something else.
The fact that you won't counter anything I said means that you can't do it. I haven't offered any excuses. In fact, I said very clearly that my arguments should not be used to make excuses. It's a shame you have to resort to such dishonesty to make a point.

Why won't you answer my question? I'll ask it again: If his deployments or a mental disorder or anything else contributed to his choices, then don't you think we should acknowledge that in order to prevent stuff like this from happening in the future?
 
Course in WWII everyone went, few families didn't have at least one male overseas. There was a strong sense of we are all in this together. Survivors of entire units came home to parades and sweet loving. The enlistment was duration plus 6 months. The war was highly censored so any soldiers raping or murdering civilians, POWs, or each other tended to be overlooked. Some were jailed for soldier on soldier but it was rare for anything else, especially in the Pacific.

Now service is a life choice like some civilian job. You enlist on your own and come out on your own. Most everyone you know found something else to do rather than 'defend freedom' in yet another armpit of this planet. Once the shooting starts the enlistments drop dramatically. Given huge re-enlistment bonuses some stay on and others go the merc route as war has become a corporate venture.

Not making any excuses, the maximum effective range of an excuse is zero meters, but let's not gloss over the past wars trying to make something more out of this one.

That was then and this is now. Men crack, ALL men do, just at what point is the question. We had a saying, "Pressure makes diamonds, or a squirt of oil if the lump of coal has a flaw in it"

Sometimes you get a diamond and sometimes a squirt...
 
Course in WWII everyone went, few families didn't have at least one male overseas. There was a strong sense of we are all in this together. Survivors of entire units came home to parades and sweet loving. The enlistment was duration plus 6 months. The war was highly censored so any soldiers raping or murdering civilians, POWs, or each other tended to be overlooked. Some were jailed for soldier on soldier but it was rare for anything else, especially in the Pacific.

Now service is a life choice like some civilian job. You enlist on your own and come out on your own. Most everyone you know found something else to do rather than 'defend freedom' in yet another armpit of this planet. Once the shooting starts the enlistments drop dramatically. Given huge re-enlistment bonuses some stay on and others go the merc route as war has become a corporate venture.

Not making any excuses, the maximum effective range of an excuse is zero meters, but let's not gloss over the past wars trying to make something more out of this one.

That was then and this is now. Men crack, ALL men do, just at what point is the question. We had a saying, "Pressure makes diamonds, or a squirt of oil if the lump of coal has a flaw in it"

Sometimes you get a diamond and sometimes a squirt...

I have a feeling american soldiers didnt go into homes at night with night vision and kill all the European civilians they could in each house until they though they had enough and returned to their base.
 
I don't think this should reflect badly on the town. It seems as if every part of America has people who simply snap these days. It has to be a societal thing.
 
Thank You for your service Sgt Bales before you killed anyone. But now you killed 16 plus one foetus. Your service is null and void now. You ought to be sent to the gallows.
 
The standard answer to the 'question' of what GI's did in WWII as an example of mass murder on civilians is we really don't know. There are recorded incidents of American soldiers murdering German civilians, English soldiers, and his fellow Americans. (Band of Brothers) Perhaps the main reason he didn't kill more is he was really drunk and M-4s and night vision didn't exist in WWII.

However there is a strong link between a feeling of racial superiority and atrocities. Japenese treatment of European POWs. Some GIs returning the favor and some rogue GIs in The 'Nam.

I make no excuses for the SSG, he is in deep kim-chi. However it isn't as if our troops are suddenly less manly or of the proper fortitude. No good purpose is served by attempting to claim a high ground for WWII GIs and looking down on this generation's troops because of the generation they rose up from.
 
How many of you judge and jury types have served America in a combat situation? How many have experienced mental anquish? How many of you have been next to a fellow human being to witness his or head blown off? How many of you have prayed to God for one more day of life so you can get back to your loved ones? How many of you expressed outrage at the TEN YEAR WAR before this event?
 
How many of you judge and jury types have served America in a combat situation? How many have experienced mental anquish? How many of you have been next to a fellow human being to witness his or head blown off? How many of you have prayed to God for one more day of life so you can get back to your loved ones? How many of you expressed outrage at the TEN YEAR WAR before this event?

None of a soldier's emotional problems detract from the fact that he killed 16 people in cold blood. While I'm sure nobody here is saying he is necessarily a bad man, what is being agreed upon is that he committed 16 murders and should be punished for it. However don't let any of that stop you from milking the emotional tit.
 
Back
Top Bottom