NationStates Jolt Archive


British Army in the dock

Vonners
19-01-2005, 13:19
I find this to be very disturbing. I had thought that after Aden lessons were learned about the treatment of local populations.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4184279.stm

British Army chief condemns abuse
Chief of the General Staff Sir Mike Jackson give evidence
Sir Mike Jackson would not comment on the case
The head of the British Army has said he "condemns utterly" any acts of abuse, as three soldiers face charges of mistreating Iraqi civilians.

General Sir Mike Jackson would not comment on the case directly, but said all allegations were taken seriously.

Charges against the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers soldiers include forcing prisoners to simulate sex acts at a Basra aid camp in May 2003.

One has admitted one assault charge, but all other charges are denied.

Sir Mike would not comment directly on 22 photographs depicting the alleged abuse of Iraqi prisoners, taken from the cameras of five servicemen, which were shown to the court.


The court was shown 22 photographs depicting alleged abuse

Alleged prisoner abuse images

But he stressed only a "small number" of the 65,000 troops serving in Iraq had been accused of any mistreatment.

The general said the court martial's outcome would be studied to see if it raised any further issues for the army.

Sir Mike said: "We condemn utterly all acts of abuse. Where there is evidence of abuse this is investigated immediately.

"We have always made clear that the proper way of dealing with allegations of abuse by the armed forces is for them to be investigated by the service police and, as appropriate, prosecuted by the independent service authorities.

"I have every confidence in the military investigative and judicial system."

The photographs include a picture of two naked Iraqi men simulating anal sex with their thumbs raised to the camera and a photograph of two Iraqi men simulating oral sex.

The offences are alleged to have taken place at the aid camp, known as Camp Bread, on or around 15 May 2003, weeks after coalition troops had ousted Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein's regime.

Lance Corporal Darren Larkin admitted one charge of assaulting an unknown man at the camp but denied another charge.

Corporal Daniel Kenyon and Lance Corporal Mark Cooley entered not guilty pleas at the court martial hearing the case in Germany.


It cannot be said that these photographs are of incidents that are anything other than shocking and appalling
Lt Col Nick Clapham, prosecuting

Charges against UK troops

Defence counsel for L/Cpl Larkin told the court martial he had always admitted responsibility for the "unacceptable and mindless" assault, which he said had "brought shame on his proud regiment and his proud family".

The three soldiers, who face a total of nine charges between them, are accused of abusing looters who were being detained at the camp in southern Iraq after attempting to steal powdered milk and food.

Lieutenant Colonel Nick Chapman, prosecuting, told the hearing the camp's commander Maj Dan Taylor had ordered looters should be "worked hard".

This breached the Geneva Convention, Lt Col Clapham said.

"The order to work by Major Taylor was an unlawful one but, even though the order was unlawful, had the defendants done no more they would not face the charges they face today," he added.

Evidence of the alleged abuse came to light when a set of photographs were left for processing at a shop in Tamworth, Staffordshire.

A developer called police because she was "disturbed by the content".

"It cannot be said that these photographs are of incidents that are anything other than shocking and appalling," Lt Col Clapham told the court.

The charges also include two relating to the alleged placing of a detainee on the forks of a forklift truck.

If found guilty, the trio, who are stationed at a British army base in Osnabruck, northern Germany, could be jailed and discharged from the army.


Perhaps inevitably some people in the media have described this as Britain's Abu Ghraib
BBC correspondent Paul Adams

They are being tried before Judge Advocate Michael Hunter and a panel of British officers in Osnabruck.

The case has been adjourned until Wednesday morning.

The court martial, which is expected to last three to four weeks, comes just three days after a US soldier was sentenced to 10 years in jail after he was found guilty of abusing prisoners at Abu Ghraib jail, near Baghdad.

Specialist Charles Graner was regarded as the ringleader at the centre of an abuse scandal at the jail.

BBC correspondent Paul Adams said it was inevitable that some people in the media would describe the case involving the UK soldiers as "Britain's Abu Ghraib".

But it was important to stress "at this extremely early stage" in proceedings that nothing heard so far pointed to "an institutional quality" that was a key aspect of the Abu Ghraib affair, he said.
NianNorth
19-01-2005, 13:42
Disturbing as it is, this was not on the scale of the US problem. All these incidents happed on one day and all civilians had been caught looting. I'm not saying they deserved what happed but these were not Iraqis' pulled off the street.
As long as the proccess is followed properly and politics is left out I'll be happy.
Vonners
19-01-2005, 13:52
Disturbing as it is, this was not on the scale of the US problem. All these incidents happed on one day and all civilians had been caught looting. I'm not saying they deserved what happed but these were not Iraqis' pulled off the street.
As long as the proccess is followed properly and politics is left out I'll be happy.

The reason I find this disturbing is that the Brits had their Abu G in Aden and Northern Ireland. Since then lessons have been learned on dealing with local populations. Yes - even looters. Especially so shortly after the deposing of Hussein.

The issue is that it damages the reputation of the British Army. Especially in Iraq. We have done some great work in the south and this insanity will do nothing to improve relations.
Portu Cale
19-01-2005, 14:00
Those people were fucking human beings!!!!!!!!

Those soldiers have no excuse, and should be punished. Hell, they shouldnt be there in the first place? Why do the British have pleasure in being american military auxiliaries?

Not to mention that everyone in iraq will now also want to eat the british..
Alien Born
19-01-2005, 14:07
The reason I find this disturbing is that the Brits had their Abu G in Aden and Northern Ireland. Since then lessons have been learned on dealing with local populations. Yes - even looters. Especially so shortly after the deposing of Hussein.

The issue is that it damages the reputation of the British Army. Especially in Iraq. We have done some great work in the south and this insanity will do nothing to improve relations.

That the same errors have been committed previously, should be cause for concern. Yes the individuals involved should be punished, but the whole system of military training needs to be reviewed. If the training system consistently creates soldiers who simply place no value in other humans, as appears to be the case, then we are doing some serious damage to the minds of our soldiers.
This, IMHO, applies to both the British and the US systems, and probably many others as well.

There is an argument that, for a soldier to be effective, he or she must not value the humanity of the enemy. This argument I believe to be flawed, as it results in conflict being the only solution sought. Amongst the rank and file this may be useful, but the senior officials are also subjected to this mindset. Result: war when it is unnecessary and torture and humiliation of "the enemy",
The Imperial Navy
19-01-2005, 14:16
Meh... Everyone goes evil in war... assholes. Being a brit I really don't care, as long as they don't bother me for it.
See u Jimmy
19-01-2005, 14:37
Those people were fucking human beings!!!!!!!!

Were the Human beings enjoying it?


I Lurvve being OOC
See u Jimmy
19-01-2005, 14:42
That the same errors have been committed previously, should be cause for concern. Yes the individuals involved should be punished, but the whole system of military training needs to be reviewed. If the training system consistently creates soldiers who simply place no value in other humans, as appears to be the case, then we are doing some serious damage to the minds of our soldiers.
This, IMHO, applies to both the British and the US systems, and probably many others as well.

There is an argument that, for a soldier to be effective, he or she must not value the humanity of the enemy. This argument I believe to be flawed, as it results in conflict being the only solution sought. Amongst the rank and file this may be useful, but the senior officials are also subjected to this mindset. Result: war when it is unnecessary and torture and humiliation of "the enemy",


I kinda agree, but IMO we are not at war, war is an agressive attacking thing, this is the peace. The army should not be trying to be policemen. They are doing it as they do many tasks, cause they are told to. They won the war, Let's all send policemen to win the peace.
The Infantry
19-01-2005, 14:50
I find it more distubing that the name of the guy in charge of of the British Army is Michael Jackson.......
BlatantSillyness
19-01-2005, 14:51
I find it more distubing that the name of the guy in charge of of the British Army is Michael Jackson.......
Next you will be slagging off the Royal Navy for being led by Admiral Donnie Osmond.
The Infantry
19-01-2005, 14:55
Next you will be slagging off the Royal Navy for being led by Admiral Donnie Osmond.
oh my.... :eek:
Independent Homesteads
19-01-2005, 15:07
Lessons about treatment of local populations have been learned and forgotten by the british army over and over again. I've always assumed that the torture of iraqi prisoners by us soldiers was ordered, and am concered that this was ordered too.

If it was just some dickheads, what can you do? You're bound to get dickheads in any army, and they should be severely punished and then kicked out.
Alien Born
19-01-2005, 15:14
I kinda agree, but IMO we are not at war, war is an agressive attacking thing, this is the peace. The army should not be trying to be policemen. They are doing it as they do many tasks, cause they are told to. They won the war, Let's all send policemen to win the peace.

Semantic argument. We are occupying a country against the will of the people of that country, they arte fighting us. To me, this is war.

Legally no war has been declared, (due to Bush not being able to guarantee congress support, which he would need to go to war), but in practice a war is being fought. It is an agressive attacking thing that is going on, the imposition of a set of values on a nation, is agressive. I am not criticising the squaddies that are out there doing their jobs, most of them very well. I am criticising the decision to create an agressive and callous mindset amongst these squaddies.
Khwarezmia
19-01-2005, 15:15
The only reason we know that this even happened is because of the press. In relation to previous conflicts, such as Vietnam (I use this example because I know someone who has witnessed it.) the local population were raped and pillaged by none Vietnamese forces wholesale. Why does it not happen now? The Press are there, it's much easier to get pictures out of a warzone than it was 40 years ago. If that did happen now, the Press would go mental.
Vonners
19-01-2005, 19:11
Although not as bad as Abu G this is still a serious situation. I am hoping that the soldiers are going down for a very very long time.

Longer than Granger....who only got 10 years and when he leaves will be set for life on the right wing nut talk show circuit
Greenmanbry
19-01-2005, 19:34
Camp Bread Basket??? :eek:


.. and I thought the Britons were a creative people..



:p
Vonners
19-01-2005, 22:59
Camp Bread Basket??? :eek:


.. and I thought the Britons were a creative people..



:p

LOL!!! Yeah we have a way with names:)