Catch a killer in a war zone... get brought up on assault charges

[fskimospy]

There can be no doubt that warriors in the heat of battle cannot simply look up the law or even rely on their training if they are 'newbies', I agree. It never is 'cut and dry'. The more often someone has faced the situation the more apt they are to react according to their training and mindset instead of a reaction based on fear and anger and what ever else may be at play. I've seen reasonable people 'break' sitting on a 'twin 50' and warp the barrels before they could be stopped.. lots of dead trees too. Imagine if there was a squad of Marines happening by at that moment... It has happened, so I'm told!
There ought to be a penalty to being the enemy and being caught although I'd not want our guys to face that situation but know they do anyhow.
However, in my mind is the law we live by and how and when to apply it is not always an easy call. Often it is mandated from on high to sate some civilian idiots notion of how this can be used to further an agenda.
Our SEALs in this case are two E5s and an E6. That should have been dealt with by the Senior Non Com/Chief and not even a Non Judicial Captain's Mast. The situation caused the 'cover up'... but both are wrong...
If I could call the shots on this I'd drop charges and let the Spelunkers of the on high caves figure out how to deal with my big mouth... heheheh

I think you seriously underestimate what sends you to captain's mast. I've seen people sent to mast for being late too many times, for gundecking a meaningless PMS check. NJP happens frequently in the Navy and for FAR lesser offenses than mistreatment of prisoners.

When you violate regulations in a way that can cause an international incident mast isn't just a risk, it's a guarantee and one you should feel lucky to get away with. There's no way those guys aren't busted down at an absolute minimum.

 

[LunarRay]

I think you seriously underestimate what sends you to captain's mast. I've seen people sent to mast for being late too many times, for gundecking a meaningless PMS check. NJP happens frequently in the Navy and for FAR lesser offenses than mistreatment of prisoners. When you violate regulations in a way that can cause an international incident mast isn't just a risk, it's a guarantee and one you should feel lucky to get away with. There's no way those guys aren't busted down at an absolute minimum.

Given that they were offered Mast I have to conclude the incident met that criteria. Having said that, I think the punch is wrong and violates law but the mitigation is the location and circumstances [I presume to the SEALs benefit on that] so he'd get a pass on that from me. The cover up also met the criteria of the Mast but that is not an easy one to deal with... where a punch and the duty bit may be 'misdemeanor' the rest (cover up) is or may be 'felony'. But to prove that they knew what is alleged is quite hard imo... you may prove they ought to have been in a position to know but if they were not they didn't lie...
I say drop the charges... interest of justice!...
End of day the Special Court has to consider the punishment at the low end [mitigation and the NJP offer] and the Convening Authority can override that decision or even give them a pre Court max sentence that will prevail over anything the Court decides if it is greater... MY opinion is that of the Convening Authority... that is what I'd do...

 

[FaaR]

I say drop the charges... interest of justice!...

How is that an interest of justice? You're preaching for where wars are fought to (supposedly) bring justice and democracy to countries that have none, and then we don't follow our own rules and self-professed ideals. What a monumental example of conceit and double standards.

You're playing right into the hands of the fanatics that hate us!

 

[fskimospy]

Given that they were offered Mast I have to conclude the incident met that criteria. Having said that, I think the punch is wrong and violates law but the mitigation is the location and circumstances [I presume to the SEALs benefit on that] so he'd get a pass on that from me. The cover up also met the criteria of the Mast but that is not an easy one to deal with... where a punch and the duty bit may be 'misdemeanor' the rest (cover up) is or may be 'felony'. But to prove that they knew what is alleged is quite hard imo... you may prove they ought to have been in a position to know but if they were not they didn't lie...
I say drop the charges... interest of justice!...
End of day the Special Court has to consider the punishment at the low end [mitigation and the NJP offer] and the Convening Authority can override that decision or even give them a pre Court max sentence that will prevail over anything the Court decides if it is greater... MY opinion is that of the Convening Authority... that is what I'd do...

Well for Captain's Mast the Captain doesn't actually need any evidence whatsoever. In fact he can bust them down just for lying to him.

Regardless as a commander you better think awfully long and hard before you allow your soldiers to break the law, maltreat prisoners, and then lie to you about it and let them get off scot free. You're going to have a unit that is completely out of control after that because they will know the rules don't apply.

Maybe these people aren't dishonorably discharged, but the captain is going to fry them as much as he can, as it should be.

 

[rudder]

Wow, just wow.

My point is that you have these guys going into highly tense situations. They are going after a guy who was behind dragging bodies through the street, burning them, and stringing from a bridge. Not only are they trying to do this without killing a bunch of people in the process, they are trying to bring him back alive. So you let your adrenaline and emotions get the best of you and you punch a prisoner. Give them a demerit and end of story.

People throwing around the word abuse as if they SEALS pulled a few fingernails off the guy, whipped him, waterboarded him, then made him sniff a dogs butt.

The military has invested a lot in these two SEALS. Imagine that 22 year old with a desire to join the SEALS. Just getting in is torture then you subject your self to some of the most dangerous missions out there. Only to lose your cool after a successful mission and possibly lose your rank. I wonder what effect this will have on future recruitment.

Maybe more details will come out..but until then I just think this whole thing should have went down a different way. Just saying.

 

[Rainsford]

Isn't the real issue that we're not exactly clear on whether or not it's a "war zone", or whether going after terrorists is "war" or "police action" or whatever? On one side we have folks who love to play it up as the ultimate war for freedom, ridiculously comparing it to WWII. But those same people are often in favor of being able to capture and indefinitely detain (and torture) the bad guys, arguing that the laws of war simply do not apply in this case.

On the other hand, you have people who argue that this should be more like law enforcement, although admittedly taking place mostly overseas. All well and good, except that soldiers are not police, and large, organized groups of terrorists aren't exactly "criminals" in the normal sense. Plus it's tough to repeatedly bring up the Geneva convention and apply it to "criminals".

Catching a killer on the streets of Baltimore has different rules than catching an enemy combatant in a war zone, and we have to decide which we're doing. Situations like this are going to keep coming up as long as people support whichever interpretation is most convenient to them at the time.

 

[fskimospy]

Wow, just wow.

My point is that you have these guys going into highly tense situations. They are going after a guy who was behind dragging bodies through the street, burning them, and stringing from a bridge. Not only are they trying to do this without killing a bunch of people in the process, they are trying to bring him back alive. So you let your adrenaline and emotions get the best of you and you punch a prisoner. Give them a demerit and end of story.

People throwing around the word abuse as if they SEALS pulled a few fingernails off the guy, whipped him, waterboarded him, then made him sniff a dogs butt.

The military has invested a lot in these two SEALS. Imagine that 22 year old with a desire to join the SEALS. Just getting in is torture then you subject your self to some of the most dangerous missions out there. Only to lose your cool after a successful mission and possibly lose your rank. I wonder what effect this will have on future recruitment.

Maybe more details will come out..but until then I just think this whole thing should have went down a different way. Just saying.

Lying to your command about violating their orders is not looked upon lightly in the military. You will fry for it every time. They will certainly be busted down a rank or two, and that's absolutely what must happen to retain control of the unit. Everyone who has spent a day in the military knows that not only will they get busted for this, but they must get busted for it.

If enforcing a command's lawful orders and punishing soldiers for making false statements to the command has a negative effect on recruitment, it is a good thing because you're keeping the dirtbags out. You WANT people to be worried about the consequences of violating orders and lying about it.

 

[LunarRay]

How is that an interest of justice? You're preaching for where wars are fought to (supposedly) bring justice and democracy to countries that have none, and then we don't follow our own rules and self-professed ideals. What a monumental example of conceit and double standards.

You're playing right into the hands of the fanatics that hate us!

Probably so...!

But, I'm speaking to a case and not an agenda that controls that case. If you see what I mean.
I am not one to want setting an example for others to see and admire. I'm for dealing with the law and the evidence or facts of a single case and looking at the mitigating conditions. I don't see as extenuating the fact that the world will be looking down their long noses at my decision. I frankly don't care about world opinion.. I care about a few SEALs trying to prosecute a freaking war objective and a battery that occurred. I don't know the exact facts but based on what I do know that is what my decision would be...

 

[LunarRay]

Well for Captain's Mast the Captain doesn't actually need any evidence whatsoever. In fact he can bust them down just for lying to him.

Regardless as a commander you better think awfully long and hard before you allow your soldiers to break the law, maltreat prisoners, and then lie to you about it and let them get off scot free. You're going to have a unit that is completely out of control after that because they will know the rules don't apply.

Maybe these people aren't dishonorably discharged, but the captain is going to fry them as much as he can, as it should be.

Eskimospy,
The Mast has punishment limits, as you know.
Consider what we don't know... We don't know why they chose a Special over Mast. We don't know all the facts. We know what has been alleged.
I don't think the 'unit' will run amok.. these are Elite forces. They are quite apart from the rest of the Navy... The Brown Water Sailor is a bit different than that of the Blue Water etc.. Airdales are off the page as well... and SEALs are in a different universe. [IMO]

I sorta know the mind set of the SEALS or what used to be UDT folks.. I guess they merged but same training, I think.. Anyhow, When I read that a SEAL punched a prisoner I'm compelled to step back and say to myself... "Self, a punch may have been issued... the why is what is at issue."

 

[LunarRay]

Isn't the real issue that we're not exactly clear on whether or not it's a "war zone", or whether going after terrorists is "war" or "police action" or whatever? On one side we have folks who love to play it up as the ultimate war for freedom, ridiculously comparing it to WWII. But those same people are often in favor of being able to capture and indefinitely detain (and torture) the bad guys, arguing that the laws of war simply do not apply in this case.

On the other hand, you have people who argue that this should be more like law enforcement, although admittedly taking place mostly overseas. All well and good, except that soldiers are not police, and large, organized groups of terrorists aren't exactly "criminals" in the normal sense. Plus it's tough to repeatedly bring up the Geneva convention and apply it to "criminals".

Catching a killer on the streets of Baltimore has different rules than catching an enemy combatant in a war zone, and we have to decide which we're doing. Situations like this are going to keep coming up as long as people support whichever interpretation is most convenient to them at the time.

We are in a war. At least Herr Bush has said we are back with his War Powers Act Resolution in Oct of '02 [if I recall correctly].

We can have Legal Combatants and Illegal ones and we can have Criminals, I guess.
When does the Convention mandate [assuming it is a mandate] control. No Constitutional protections control in Afghanistan, IMO. The Convention tells us how to treat POW's and other Classes of Detainee. The UCMJ is a guide for the conduct of the military. IMO, it is the tool used to control and enforce discipline within Military.
I can advance a theory that suggests that the SEAL hit the detainee to keep him quite to avoid a riot. In a jail in the US that person might be shot dead for creating a riot or beat up to get that person under control. One uses the force necessary to effect the conditions applicable to the objective... Does someone have in mind what exactly the facts are on this? Based on what I've read we know some stuff but not all stuff.
We ought to let the thread rest a bit until we can dialog with more certainty as to the box in which this case rests.

 

[fskimospy]

Eskimospy,
The Mast has punishment limits, as you know.
Consider what we don't know... We don't know why they chose a Special over Mast. We don't know all the facts. We know what has been alleged.
I don't think the 'unit' will run amok.. these are Elite forces. They are quite apart from the rest of the Navy... The Brown Water Sailor is a bit different than that of the Blue Water etc.. Airdales are off the page as well... and SEALs are in a different universe. [IMO]

I sorta know the mind set of the SEALS or what used to be UDT folks.. I guess they merged but same training, I think.. Anyhow, When I read that a SEAL punched a prisoner I'm compelled to step back and say to myself... "Self, a punch may have been issued... the why is what is at issue."

I absolutely know a good bit about the mind of SEALS, as I know quite a few. BUDS is about 5 miles from my house and I've known at least half a dozen SEALs well in my time. One of my best friends on my boat was a guy sent to a ship after he almost killed a guy in a bar fight in Bahrain. They have discipline problems too and even the best unit will run amok when they realize the rules no longer apply to them.

They are making a dangerous decision with going to court martial instead of captain's mast, but I imagine they are doing it precisely because they know the CO is going to send them up the river for disobeying his orders. If he wasn't going to fry them, then I doubt this would have even come up as a news story. So... it would appear likely that the CO agrees with me about what you do with an elite unit when people disobey orders and lie about it, you put down the hammer so it doesn't happen again.

Oh, and while CO's mast has limits, those limits are FAR below what will ruin your career. He could bust them 2 pay grades, give them 45/45 restriction/extra duty, and possibly process them for discharge if he felt like it, not to mention kick them back to the fleet.

 

[LunarRay]

I absolutely know a good bit about the mind of SEALS, as I know quite a few. BUDS is about 5 miles from my house and I've known at least half a dozen SEALs well in my time. One of my best friends on my boat was a guy sent to a ship after he almost killed a guy in a bar fight in Bahrain. They have discipline problems too and even the best unit will run amok when they realize the rules no longer apply to them.

They are making a dangerous decision with going to court martial instead of captain's mast, but I imagine they are doing it precisely because they know the CO is going to send them up the river for disobeying his orders. If he wasn't going to fry them, then I doubt this would have even come up as a news story. So... it would appear likely that the CO agrees with me about what you do with an elite unit when people disobey orders and lie about it, you put down the hammer so it doesn't happen again.

Oh, and while CO's mast has limits, those limits are FAR below what will ruin your career. He could bust them 2 pay grades, give them 45/45 restriction/extra duty, and possibly process them for discharge if he felt like it, not to mention kick them back to the fleet.

Ok 🙂 Up the coast a bit we think differently than way down there where you live... I saw a bunch of Seals in La Jolla the other day and they looked quite laid back... They have little defense against what might want to have them for lunch so they have learned how to swim fast but a determined hungry Seal eater will try to compensate. I hope our SEALs prevail. But that is me...

When I first read about this issue I was upset over the 'lies' but not so about the actual treatment bit. I guess that is simply how I am. Sorta like when my kids would break a window and say, "I'm Sorry"... I'd say don't be sorry be smart. I don't know if that philosophy flows but it is mine.

I suppose at the end of the day if you create an Elite Gorilla you still have a Gorilla... I can't imagine why anyone would want to endure the SEAL life. All to wear a Trident? ... What mind set wants to be the best of the best? I wonder what might have gone wrong when you have the best doing the hardest with the best training and constant psychologial evaluation.
I can't imagine a SEAL simply lying... Guess times have changed! But, until I know the full story, I can't formulate more than a 'IF this then That' type opinion.

EDIT: btw, Coronado if way too far for me to travel... Del Mar is too far south and Rancho is too far East... heck, I'm not sure life exists East of 101.... 😉

 

[yuppiejr]

Innocent until proven guilty, let these guys have their day in court and hopefully law and common sense will prevail. I'd buy these guys all the beer they could drink for catching this piece of trash and punching him in the face. Lesson here should be "dead men tell no tales."

 

[fskimospy]

Innocent until proven guilty, let these guys have their day in court and hopefully law and common sense will prevail. I'd buy these guys all the beer they could drink for catching this piece of trash and punching him in the face. Lesson here should be "dead men tell no tales."

No, the answer to being busted for violating regulations and the UCMJ is not to start murdering people.

 

[fskimospy]

Ok 🙂 Up the coast a bit we think differently than way down there where you live... I saw a bunch of Seals in La Jolla the other day and they looked quite laid back... They have little defense against what might want to have them for lunch so they have learned how to swim fast but a determined hungry Seal eater will try to compensate. I hope our SEALs prevail. But that is me...

When I first read about this issue I was upset over the 'lies' but not so about the actual treatment bit. I guess that is simply how I am. Sorta like when my kids would break a window and say, "I'm Sorry"... I'd say don't be sorry be smart. I don't know if that philosophy flows but it is mine.

I suppose at the end of the day if you create an Elite Gorilla you still have a Gorilla... I can't imagine why anyone would want to endure the SEAL life. All to wear a Trident? ... What mind set wants to be the best of the best? I wonder what might have gone wrong when you have the best doing the hardest with the best training and constant psychologial evaluation.
I can't imagine a SEAL simply lying... Guess times have changed! But, until I know the full story, I can't formulate more than a 'IF this then That' type opinion.

EDIT: btw, Coronado if way too far for me to travel... Del Mar is too far south and Rancho is too far East... heck, I'm not sure life exists East of 101.... 😉

The seals in La Jolla are great, and what's even better is it looks like they will finally be able to stay! I for one think that's fabulous. (we have enough damn kids beach areas) Del Mar is too far north for me, in fact going up to La Jolla for school seemed like a long drive from Ocean Beach for me. I'm not entirely convinced life exists above the 52... haha. I'm certain that no intelligent life exists east of the 15.

I think running a military unit and raising kids are two very different things. When your kids disobey you maybe you have a broken window, but when people disobey orders in the military, people can die. Letting troops get away with breaking the rules undermines the authority of a commander, and it makes things more dangerous for everyone. You can't have people breaking regs and then lying to you if you're trying to run a unit, you just can't. I understand the feeling where it seems unfair, but the rules are there for a very good reason.

 

[yuppiejr]

No, the answer to being busted for violating regulations and the UCMJ is not to start murdering people.

There is no violation if an enemy combatant is engaged and killed. I'm not advocating murder, I'm advocating a cautious approach to throwing members of the military under the political bus. I'm implying it's human nature to take the path of least resistance, you keep publicly second guessing members of the military for their treatment of prisoners until all of the facts are available you may end up with fewer prisoners to later press charges.

 

[fskimospy]

There is no violation if an enemy combatant is engaged and killed. I'm not advocating murder, I'm advocating a cautious approach to throwing members of the military under the political bus. I'm implying it's human nature to take the path of least resistance, you keep publicly second guessing members of the military for their treatment of prisoners until all of the facts are available you may end up with fewer prisoners to later press charges.

Political bus? What are you talking about? Anyone who has spent any time in the military will tell you that if you break regs and lie to your CO about it, when he finds out your ass is toast. Period. That appears to be what happened here. The same thing happens every day in the military but you don't hear about it because it doesn't have to do with notable detainees.

There's no second guessing going on here, it was the CO's decision to bust them for what they did and they exercised their right under the UCMJ to a court martial instead of NJP, which would have certainly been handed down.

 

[kylebisme]

Political bus? What are you talking about? Anyone who has spent any time in the military will tell you that if you break regs and lie to your CO about it, when he finds out your ass is toast.

I agree with your arguments, never having served myself, but having been raised by the military, my father with 24 years of combined service, 5 as a marine enlisted before I was born and 19 as an army officer starting just prior to my birth. That said, there is some political bullshit going on here when people like Rumsfeld can order prisoner abuse far worse than smacking a guy in the jaw, lie about it, and get away with it, while these grunts are being taken to task for far less. Granted that is no excuse for what they did, and I support dealing with them accordingly, but they are a minor symptom of a much larger problem which we arn't rightly dealing with.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Do you know the SAS's Ben griffin? I would say that, by the research he is doing (http://www.spokesmanbooks.com/Spokesman/PDF/griffin99.pdf) there is a little more to it than meets the eye..... Some kind of Policy.... Did you know that both of our governments still allow rendition???? Got to be careful on the battlefield though...Don't want the public seeing what we are up to. We will just show them that we don't allow our soldiers to physically harm the enemy. Ayup, we will make sure that this view makes it into the mainstream media...

Wow, all of this text and you STILL don't understand the difference between harm done to the enemy on the battlefield and harm done to a prisoner in custody?

You should join the Marines, you'd fit right in, i hear they are looking for a few good retards right about now.

 

[yuppiejr]

Political bus? What are you talking about? Anyone who has spent any time in the military will tell you that if you break regs and lie to your CO about it, when he finds out your ass is toast. Period. That appears to be what happened here. The same thing happens every day in the military but you don't hear about it because it doesn't have to do with notable detainees.

There's no second guessing going on here, it was the CO's decision to bust them for what they did and they exercised their right under the UCMJ to a court martial instead of NJP, which would have certainly been handed down.

I believe you explained the "political bus" concept better than I could have - this should be a routine "soldier a/b/c f-ed up, broke regs and lied about it" case but because of the "notable detainees" involved and overall political sensitivity about prisoner treatment in Iraq has been taken up on both sides as either an example of prisoner abuse on the left or political correctness negatively impacting military operations on the right.

This is a military problem for which a process exists to deal with - rather than having talking heads on both sides turning this into a political issue let the process work and the facts come out before we start causing soldiers to second guess their decisions in the field for fear of being dragged through the court of public opinion without due process.

 

[fskimospy]

I believe you explained the "political bus" concept better than I could have - this should be a routine "soldier a/b/c f-ed up, broke regs and lied about it" case but because of the "notable detainees" involved and overall political sensitivity about prisoner treatment in Iraq has been taken up on both sides as either an example of prisoner abuse on the left or political correctness negatively impacting military operations on the right.

This is a military problem for which a process exists to deal with - rather than having talking heads on both sides turning this into a political issue let the process work and the facts come out before we start causing soldiers to second guess their decisions in the field for fear of being dragged through the court of public opinion without due process.

I don't think you are getting exactly what happened though. They already obviously did enough wrong to merit NJP. (no one requests a court martial unless the CO is already about to hammer them) NJP is serious business, in most cases you're screwed. So it's not a case of 'man there are these unproven allegations, who knows what happened'. In any normal situation these guys would already be 2 ranks lower scrubbing toilets on their 45/45. It might have appeared in the media because of the notable detainee, but there's no political bus anywhere involved.

If soldiers were going to second guess themselves (and they damn well should before socking prisoners), they were already going to do so due to the regulations in place. Just the power vested in their CO is more than enough to ruin their careers and seriously screw up their lives... no court martial needed.

 

[LunarRay]

So it's not a case of 'man there are these unproven allegations, who knows what happened'. In any normal situation these guys would already be 2 ranks lower scrubbing toilets on their 45/45. It might have appeared in the media because of the notable detainee, but there's no political bus anywhere involved.

I'm not so sure. It is possible that they felt they were being railroaded by a terrorist claim. I don't really see what evidence there is. Filing charges is one thing but defending against them is not really a Mast situation. Consider for a moment the why in their choice... What made them choose a CM over Mast. Could it be they are not guilty as charged?

Edit: This is all they or anyone says about why... "The three newly-charged SEALs, believing they acted appropriately in and after the clandestine capture operation, have rejected non-judicial punishments and requested formal, separate courts-martial." Accepting NJP is almost the same as admitting guilt...

 

[fskimospy]

I'm not so sure. It is possible that they felt they were being railroaded by a terrorist claim. I don't really see what evidence there is. Filing charges is one thing but defending against them is not really a Mast situation. Consider for a moment the why in their choice... What made them choose a CM over Mast. Could it be they are not guilty as charged?

Edit: This is all they or anyone says about why... "The three newly-charged SEALs, believing they acted appropriately in and after the clandestine capture operation, have rejected non-judicial punishments and requested formal, separate courts-martial." Accepting NJP is almost the same as admitting guilt...

The standard for drawing up charges in a case like this is way WAY higher than the standard the CO needs to bust you down. All you need to bring someone to mast is an uncoroborated report by a senior. (technically the CO doesn't need anything at all) It's possible they feel they are being railroaded, but people captured make these sorts of claims CONSTANTLY. 99.9% of them are dismissed without a second thought. It's pretty likely that they did what they are charged with.

Accepting NJP isn't admitting guilt, your stance as to your guilt or innocence isn't really relevant to NJP. What these guys are betting on, probably correctly, is that a jury won't convict them while the CO would. Military juries are historically extremely lenient on fellow troops.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

The standard for drawing up charges in a case like this is way WAY higher than the standard the CO needs to bust you down. All you need to bring someone to mast is an uncoroborated report by a senior. (technically the CO doesn't need anything at all) It's possible they feel they are being railroaded, but people captured make these sorts of claims CONSTANTLY. 99.9% of them are dismissed without a second thought. It's pretty likely that they did what they are charged with.

Accepting NJP isn't admitting guilt, your stance as to your guilt or innocence isn't really relevant to NJP. What these guys are betting on, probably correctly, is that a jury won't convict them while the CO would. Military juries are historically extremely lenient on fellow troops.

You know better than that, accepthing a NJP IS admitting guilt to everyone who serves.

I would never do it and i'm glad fewer and fewer are because the trials set new standards to follow.

Truth is, they might very well be found guilty, after Abu and Kabul there have been changes, a few "good men" fucked it up for everyone else.

 

[fskimospy]

You know better than that, accepthing a NJP IS admitting guilt to everyone who serves.

I would never do it and i'm glad fewer and fewer are because the trials set new standards to follow.

Truth is, they might very well be found guilty, after Abu and Kabul there have been changes, a few "good men" fucked it up for everyone else.

I completely disagree. Accepting NJP is the admission that you don't want to take the issue to a court martial, nothing else. I've known quite a few people subject to NJP who thought it was bullshit but didn't want the huge deal of a court martial.