Royal Marine

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 6:24 pm

Cheers for the comments by the military bods by the way, its good to hear the views from people who have been there to balance out the images that we can all see on youtube.

BFC Gold · Post by **BFC Gold** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 6:25 pm

True to form and as one would expect, the usual yoghurt knitting brigade are spouting off their self-important drivel from their lofty perches once more. In the main the British Forces ethos is built on loyalty to their colleagues and to defend their country.
Some people on here are too busy trying to play the `better person` card with the aim to fuel their own shallow, insecure and fragile egos. It seems that their are too many comments by people on here with no idea and even less in the testicles department too but of course thats just my humble and uneducated opinion. Fools.

DCWat · Post by **DCWat** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 6:25 pm

box_of_frogs wrote:You are obviously allowed your own opinion (I think, does that apply on this forum!?). Out of interest, are you a Serviceman or Servicewomen? If not, then in my opinion you don't get a vote on what you think is a disgrace to the uniform I wear as I type this now!

You think he's a disgrace, fine, I accept your opinion but I think you're wrong. Be grateful that you sleep peacefully (i hope) in your bed at night only because rough men (and women) stand ready to do violence on your behalf. Sometimes that violence is misguided. sh1t happens and he's paid his price.

First question answered in first paragraph, b of f.

Why can a civilian not have a vote? **** happens, he murdered someone in a defenceless position and calculated the fact he was going to do it.

Bacchus · Post by **Bacchus** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 6:36 pm

From my my understanding it's not about whether what he did was right, justifiable, understandable or acceptable. It was clearly none of those things. Focusing on any of that takes away from what this was really about which is mental health. Was he well enough to be held responsible for his actions? Doubtful that anyone could say for sure, but the experts seem to think that he wasn't and the judgement supported that view.

Whether this opens up a door to people who want to manipulate this ruling in future is an obvious concern, but maybe it's a good thing that this case has had such publicity and that soldiers are now more widely understood to be susceptible to such conditions in the stressful environments in which they work.

BennyD · Post by **BennyD** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 6:38 pm

box_of_frogs wrote:We call them REMF's in a friendly sort of way. Without the REMF, the teeth arms are useless!

Absolutely, I couldn't agree more. However, no matter how much of a good job the REMFs do their everyday stresses were, I suggest, considerably less than those experienced by soldier A and his men and, I've just seen, yourself. Respect.

box_of_frogs · Post by **box_of_frogs** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 6:41 pm

DCWat wrote: Why can a civilian not have a vote?

I say that you don't get a vote, because if you don't wear the uniform then you don't know what makes me think "he's a disgrace to my uniform". This doesn't.

box_of_frogs · Post by **box_of_frogs** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 6:42 pm

BennyD wrote:Absolutely, I couldn't agree more. However, no matter how much of a good job the REMFs do their everyday stresses were, I suggest, considerably less than those experienced by soldier A and his men.

Yeah, sometimes the Pizza Hut ran out of dough. That must've been hell for them....

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 6:51 pm

box_of_frogs wrote:I say that you don't get a vote, because if you don't wear the uniform then you don't know what makes me think "he's a disgrace to my uniform". This doesn't.

OK. He was literally "dismissed with disgrace" by a court martial but I suppose your dumb little opinions different to mine are wrong attitude will have accounted for that fact.

box_of_frogs · Post by **box_of_frogs** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 6:56 pm

Oh turtle, you just have to lower the tone of the thread with the 'dumb' remark. More than happy to talk about people opinions, even when their opinion is wrong in my view.

I'd thought you were better than that...... Clearly not.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 6:57 pm

box_of_frogs wrote:You are obviously allowed your own opinion (I think, does that apply on this forum!?). Out of interest, are you a Serviceman or Servicewomen? If not, then in my opinion you don't get a vote on what you think is a disgrace to the uniform I wear as I type this now!

You think he's a disgrace, fine, I accept your opinion but I think you're wrong. Be grateful that you sleep peacefully (i hope) in your bed at night only because rough men (and women) stand ready to do violence on your behalf. Sometimes that violence is misguided. sh1t happens and he's paid his price.

Was anyone else reminded of Jack Nicholson's Marine Colonel from a Few Good Men when they read that 2nd paragraph?

box_of_frogs · Post by **box_of_frogs** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 6:58 pm

Sidney1st wrote:Was anyone else reminded of Jack Nicholson's Marine Colonel from a Few Good Men when they read that 2nd paragraph?

Obviously!!!

box_of_frogs · Post by **box_of_frogs** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 6:59 pm

You can't handle the truth.....

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 7:02 pm

I think the truth has been established, he shot a bloke in cold blood and told his mates to keep it quiet, stating that he'd broken the Geneva convention.
If he was mentally unstable he shouldn't have been out there, but in that regards the Army messed up by failing in their duty of care.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 7:03 pm

box_of_frogs wrote:Oh turtle, you just have to lower the tone of the thread with the 'dumb' remark. More than happy to talk about people opinions, even when their opinion is wrong in my view.

I'd thought you were better than that...... Clearly not.

I thought your opinion that civvies can't have a valid opinion on the conduct of our military to be dumb, so I said so.
I trust you're not one of those who think if I'm calling an opinion dumb then I must be calling you dumb.

box_of_frogs · Post by **box_of_frogs** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 7:13 pm

A civilian can indeed have an opinion about the conduct of the military. Most on here will agree that he was wrong although to what level is a matter for debate. However, I personally don't think someone can have an opinion on what 'disgraces Servicemen and women', when they aren't one themselves.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 7:21 pm

When he admits to breaking the Geneva convention then we can safely say he's disgraced the uniform.

DCWat · Post by **DCWat** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 7:22 pm

box_of_frogs wrote:I say that you don't get a vote, because if you don't wear the uniform then you don't know what makes me think "he's a disgrace to my uniform". This doesn't.

Playing the pedant, I didn't mention uniform, but I get your point. Whether or not you think he's a disgrace to the uniform, being from the services, is perhaps of less importance than the view of those outside the forces.

I would, in many respects expect someone from the army to hold such an opinion. For what it's worth, it's certainly not a view held by all from the armed forces, from a discussion that I had with someone currently serving within the Navy / RAF.

box_of_frogs · Post by **box_of_frogs** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 7:27 pm

To be really pedantic, Marine A is in the Navy, not the Army!

I'll go back to my first post on the subject, manslaughter is the right choice in my view.

DCWat · Post by **DCWat** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 7:33 pm

To be doubly pedantic, I didn't make reference to which of the forces he represented.

You're fully entitled to that view and I'm under no illusion that you have far more insight than me (great post on the previous page by the way) but I do struggle with how the situation appeared to unfold, what was said and the actions that were then taken.

It seemed pretty calculated and considered to me and although I'm not stating it as fact, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the stress card was being played to aid in the outcome achieved today.

No Ney Never · Post by **No Ney Never** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 7:33 pm

Shame the bloke didn't turn off his body cam. If it had been me, I wouldn't have been so kind as to put him out of his misery, I'd have tortured the bstrd.

Cirrus_Minor · Post by **Cirrus_Minor** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 7:38 pm

I find this very disturbing.

My father was a soldier in WW2. He always used to say that once an enemy was captured or 'in the bag' they should be protected since they were out of operation. Believe me it didn't get much more stressful than this, but no excuse would be accepted for any harm to their prisoners.

Shooting someone who is laying on the ground injured is cowardly and can be nothing but murder, I don't care who you are.

Rileybobs · Post by **Rileybobs** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 7:41 pm

box_of_frogs wrote:A civilian can indeed have an opinion about the conduct of the military. Most on here will agree that he was wrong although to what level is a matter for debate. However, I personally don't think someone can have an opinion on what 'disgraces Servicemen and women', when they aren't one themselves.

Soldiers serve their country. What a ridiculous comment to suggest that a civilian can't judge someone as being a disgrace to the British Armed Forces.

As for civilians not knowing what the pressure of combat is like - I can say for certain that I don't. Although I also don't know what state of mind I'd be in if I walked in on my wife bonking another bloke but I still know that it would be wrong to blow the guys head off.

Jakubclaret · Post by **Jakubclaret** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 7:53 pm

DCWat wrote:I find the stress card a little convenient in this instance, admittedly though without either experience of being in such an environment or understanding of the mental issues he may have been suffering from.

I find it hard to believe that someone who was not of sound mind at the time of the incident would have had the wherewithal to discuss keeping it quiet with his comrades, be fully aware of the convention he was breaking and ensuring that the incident remained off camera.

Whether or not the wounded man would have been difficult or dangerous to move, it was not his decision to make. I get the picture of a thug who took advantage of his position and committed a calculated act, which for me means it was murderous.

The bloke is a disgrace to all of the British service men and women who do a hugely difficult job in unimaginable situations, but manage to do it within the rules of engagement.

As has been said, acting in this way makes us as bad as the animals that we are trying to defeat and I'm sure only goes to hinder the effort to win hearts and minds in the communities in which they are operating.

He will now no doubt earn a fortune from interviews, books and whatever else the publicity agents can get for him. He shouldn't be allowed to make a single penny from this sorry affair.

Couldn't agree more. I'm ex forces & any renegade fighter who wantonly disregards any commanding orders or breaches any set protocol is a disgrace to the rank & uniform regardless of the situation all the intensive training you receive is a mechanism to cope with whatever combat brings & it wasn't like he holed in the trenches alone behind enemy lines.

evensteadiereddie · Post by **evensteadiereddie** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 7:58 pm

He's a very lucky bloke, having reduced himself to the "uncivilised savages" he was supposed to fighting and escaped punishment. He's no better than them and if he's happy with himself all well and good. I think a lot of service personnel, past and present, will consider him a disgrace to the uniform. They'll probably keep quiet so as not to rock the boat and leave the gung-ho bullcrap to the idiots.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 8:12 pm

He's not escaped punishment.

pureclaret · Post by **pureclaret** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 12:34 am

never having killed a person myself not sure how if you have 30 confirmed kills in combat it affects you. And whilst he did break Geneva convention I thought it only applied if all partys had singed up to it.
Perhaps ex vets on here can explain what goes through your mind as you kill someone and what happens to you afterwards.

LoveCurryPies · Post by **LoveCurryPies** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 1:49 am

We don't have to behave on the same level as the Taliban. If we do, we are now better than them. I understand it's war but somehow we have to try to hang on to our morals.

ClaretMoffitt · Post by **ClaretMoffitt** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 6:17 am

Love the judgement on here from people sat in their comfy arm chairs in nice, safe office jobs etc about the actions of a man who literally had to witness his allies body parts hanging from trees.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 6:31 am

ClaretMoffitt wrote:Love the judgement on here from people sat in their comfy arm chairs in nice, safe office jobs etc about the actions of a man who literally had to witness his allies body parts hanging from trees.

Shutting down discussion with "you weren't there, maaaaaaan!"

A court martial called him a disgrace, so why is it not okay for us to call him one?

2 Bee Holed · Post by **2 Bee Holed** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 6:35 am

For those of you that think this was murder, I assume you have studied this in great depth
and have full knowledge of the situation these men had been in for the previous hours, days and weeks?
The Marines tour mission was to deliberately draw out the Taliban. They had been suffering heavy losses.
On this particular operation they had been under intense fire for hours so they had called in a helicopter strike.
The helicopter strike left some of the Taliban dead, some survived and this one was very badly injured.
They couldn't be sure of exact numbers of each. Two of Marine A's younger soldiers were brandishing
their side arms intent on killing him. So what do you do now? How do you get this badly injured
man out? This man who has just been trying to kill you.
How do you Med-Evac him, when there are still active Taliban in the area?
You cannot secure the area, you are under fire, so you cannot bring a helicopter in.
Are you going to order 2,3 or 4 of your men to go and carry him out to a secure area that could be miles away?
Are you going to do that and ask them to risk their lives? Or are you going to leave him to die?
Personally, I really don't think this is as black and white as is being made out by some of you.
I really would appreciate it if those who think this was murder would tell me what Marine A should have done,
and what they think has happened in all other wars.

ClaretMoffitt · Post by **ClaretMoffitt** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 6:53 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:
Shutting down discussion with "you weren't there, maaaaaaan!"

A court martial called him a disgrace, so why is it not okay for us to call him one?

Because a court ruled that he was acting under extreme stress from battle and was not in a fit state of mind. Actual psychiatrists who specialise in this sort of case ruled it beyond doubt. But sure, the outraged liberals thirsting for his incarceration know better.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 6:55 am

2 Bee Holed wrote:For those of you that think this was murder, I assume you have studied this in great depth
and have full knowledge of the situation these men had been in for the previous hours, days and weeks?
The Marines tour mission was to deliberately draw out the Taliban. They had been suffering heavy losses.
On this particular operation they had been under intense fire for hours so they had called in a helicopter strike.
The helicopter strike left some of the Taliban dead, some survived and this one was very badly injured.
They couldn't be sure of exact numbers of each. Two of Marine A's younger soldiers were brandishing
their side arms intent on killing him. So what do you do now? How do you get this badly injured
man out? This man who has just been trying to kill you.
How do you Med-Evac him, when there are still active Taliban in the area?
You cannot secure the area, you are under fire, so you cannot bring a helicopter in.
Are you going to order 2,3 or 4 of your men to go and carry him out to a secure area that could be miles away?
Are you going to do that and ask them to risk their lives? Or are you going to leave him to die?
Personally, I really don't think this is as black and white as is being made out by some of you.
I really would appreciate it if those who think this was murder would tell me what Marine A should have done,
and what they think has happened in all other wars.

I would suggest that perhaps not deliberately dragging the injured fighter out of view of aerial surveillance in order to shoot him without being seen is something he should have done.

You're going to have a tough time making the "out of his misery" argument, which is what i think you're angling for, while also accepting "combat stress" as his defence. He's either thinking cleary or he's not, it can't be both.

But entertaining the former anyway, i'd suggest just leaving him to die. It might not be the most humane thing to do but it's better than murder and the man made his bed already, so if it's too dangerous to extract him then just leave him behind. Do you think, under the "thinking clearly" scenario that giving the guy a slightly quicker death is worth risking your military career over? Forgetting the fact that it's illegal, it's pretty stupid to take that risk for someone who so obviously doesn't deserve it. Such poor judgement alone should be enough to say "actually, we change our mind. We don't trust you with firearms and explosives any more".

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 6:58 am

ClaretMoffitt wrote:Because a court ruled that he was acting under extreme stress from battle and was not in a fit state of mind. Actual psychiatrists who specialise in this sort of case ruled it beyond doubt. But sure, the outraged liberals thirsting for his incarceration know better.

So it's OK to disagree with the initial conviction but not OK to disagree with the appeals decision? That's an interesting, yet unsurprising, example of hypocrisy.

ClaretMoffitt · Post by **ClaretMoffitt** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 7:00 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:So it's OK to disagree with the initial conviction but not OK to disagree with the appeals decision? That's an interesting, yet unsurprising, example of hypocrisy.

The ruling was changed in light of additional, substantial evidence. Is that not the intelligent thing to do? Form your view around the facts? Not the facts around your view.

2 Bee Holed · Post by **2 Bee Holed** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 7:21 am

IT: I am not angling for anything. OK so you'd leave him to die.
He probably felt pressured because his younger Troops were agitated
and possibly would have shot him anyway, so he took over the situation.
I assume they removed his weapons and searched him for intel.
I am sat behind a keyboard and in a nice calm situation.
I would probably have disarmed him, searched him for intel, made sure he wasn't a threat
and left him to die too. I might also have given him a shot of morphine to quell his screaming and
moaning.
I was genuinely wondering what those who accuse him of murder would have done.
Can any serving soldier legally tell me when these body cams came in and do they relay images back to HQ?
I am glad they weren't around during my time!

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 7:31 am

ClaretMoffitt wrote:The ruling was changed in light of additional, substantial evidence. Is that not the intelligent thing to do? Form your view around the facts? Not the facts around your view.

Of course it is, but i remember how people were foaming at the mouth when he was initially convicted, before this evidence came to light. It's the same with the idiot who brought illegal firearms back. The illegality of it didn't matter, people wanted him off because he was one of Our Boys™ which is exactly the same with many if not most people who disagreed with the original conviction of Sgt. Blackman.

I don't mind that you disagree with people, i mind the hypocrisy of saying they should agree with the court's ruling because it's the court's ruling when the very reason we have appeals is if you disagree with a court's ruling.

Seperate to your post, one thing that it going to be kinda funny is that there are so many people who happily accept that this guy was suffering from a mental illness, as the evidence suggests he was, will be quick to decry and dismiss evidence of mental illness if, say, a brown guy spits in a baby's face. I wonder if i look up that thread will i find anyone demanding prison for that guy in that thread, yet freedom for this one.

Healeywoodclaret · Post by **Healeywoodclaret** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:15 am

Sidney1st wrote:I think the truth has been established, he shot a bloke in cold blood and told his mates to keep it quiet, stating that he'd broken the Geneva convention.
If he was mentally unstable he shouldn't have been out there, but in that regards the Army messed up by failing in their duty of care.

The Army? Goes to show just how little you know. Royal Marines Commandos are nothing to do with the Army. The clue is in the name.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:16 am

Healeywoodclaret wrote:The Army? Goes to show just how little you know. Royal Marines Commandos are nothing to do with the Army. The clue is in the name.

Forgive me for the basic error of lumping everyone together

.

He was still let down though by those who should have a duty of care to his mental well being.

Jakubclaret · Post by **Jakubclaret** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:18 am

ClaretMoffitt wrote:Love the judgement on here from people sat in their comfy arm chairs in nice, safe office jobs etc about the actions of a man who literally had to witness his allies body parts hanging from trees.

Far from it ive seen alot worse. The only thing hanging from trees is dates & fruits around kandahar/helmand its mostly scrubland desert. I think too many people have been on there ps4 or xbox playing medal of honour or killzone video games & imagine combat is similar.

Healeywoodclaret · Post by **Healeywoodclaret** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:19 am

Why should I forgive you? You've had plenty to say on this subject and have admitted to a basic error. You are not fit or qualified to stand in judgement.

Wexford_Claret · Post by **Wexford_Claret** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:22 am

Why not? He's a British Citizen.

evensteadiereddie · Post by **evensteadiereddie** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:23 am

Not another lousy "mental illness" excuse........oh, hang on, he's white and one of "Your Boys" ?
That's alright, then.

quoonbeatz · Post by **quoonbeatz** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:23 am

Healeywoodclaret wrote:But as usual all the big mouths with big opinions of themselves, who have absolutely no clue as to what it might be like doing such a dangerous job are all posting today. I really do despair.

it doesn't matter what i or anyone else would do in that situation, all that matters is what blackman did.

there's no doubt he'd experienced a lot of stress and seen things i hope most people never see; i've every sympathy for him on that. i've got family and friends in the forces who have done tours since the first gulf war, including in afghanistan. and i've no doubt that most of the people serving in our forces do a brilliant job, sometimes under horrendous, brutal conditions.

the thing is that they manage to do that job without killing people in cold blood and trying to cover it up. we're not talking about someone making a split-second, life or death decision here. we're talking about someone who had a discussion with his colleagues about shooting the guy in the chest because the head would be too 'obvious'; made sure they couldn't be seen from the air before carrying out the killing and admitting to breaking the geneva convention.

i'm sure his mental health had suffered a lot but the transcripts, footage and audio do not paint a picture of a man who didn't know exactly what he was doing. there was a thread on here last week where people were saying that mental illness was no excuse for spitting in a baby's face. it shouldn't be for murder either.

you can say the other side don't play by the rules but we do and we should. we have standards, which is why so many people have such respect for our armed forces. blackman has badly tarnished that.

Healeywoodclaret · Post by **Healeywoodclaret** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:25 am

Cirrus_Minor wrote:I find this very disturbing.

My father was a soldier in WW2. He always used to say that once an enemy was captured or 'in the bag' they should be protected since they were out of operation. Believe me it didn't get much more stressful than this, but no excuse would be accepted for any harm to their prisoners.

Shooting someone who is laying on the ground injured is cowardly and can be nothing but murder, I don't care who you are.

Lying on the ground injured. He had a grenade in his pocket intent on murder himself. If course had he been successful and Sgt Blackman and his men had come back in body bags or minus limbs what would you say? Oh deary me?

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:27 am

What branch of the military are you in Healeywood?

evensteadiereddie · Post by **evensteadiereddie** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:37 am

"Lying on the ground injured. He had a grenade in his pocket intent on murder himself. If course had he been successful and Sgt Blackman and his men had come back in body bags or minus limbs what would you say? Oh deary me?"

Intent on murder ? Killing enemy soldiers, you mean ?

As apologists go, you are so, so crap. your justification argument is so lame. You're doing the cowardly thug no favours here.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:50 am

Healeywoodclaret wrote:Why should I forgive you? You've had plenty to say on this subject and have admitted to a basic error. You are not fit or qualified to stand in judgement.

You can stick that one somewhere right now.
My dad thinks the same as me and he's a former soldier funnily enough, who did tours of Ireland.

KRBFC · Post by **KRBFC** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 9:02 am

Are people really this arsed about a dead taliban fighter? The more get slaughtered like the animals they are, the better. Kill or be killed, do people think those rats wouldn't do the same thing? In fact they would leave you alive as long as possible to make you suffer more.

evensteadiereddie · Post by **evensteadiereddie** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 9:04 am

You're right , Sidney the only thing we can say in his favour is that at least Healey's hypocrisy is consistent.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 9:05 am

KRBFC wrote:Are people really this arsed about a dead taliban fighter?

I'm pretty sure no one on this thread, or any other on this site, is at all arsed about the Taliban fighter.