Gurkha ordered back to UK after beheading dead Taliban fighter

Castiel said:
Back to the Geneva Convention however:
Article 2 GPGC:

1..In addition to the provisions which shall be implemented in peace time, the present Convention shall apply to all cases of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them.

2..The Convention shall also apply to all cases of partial or total occupation of the territory of a High Contracting Party, even if the said occupation meets with no armed resistance.

3.. Although one of the Powers in conflict may not be a party to the present Convention, the Powers who are parties thereto shall remain bound by it in their mutual relations. They shall furthermore be bound by the Convention in relation to the said Power, if the latter accepts and applies the provisions thereof.

Article 3 GPGC.

1..Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria. To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:

* violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;
* taking of hostages;
* outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment;
* the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.

Basically as long as the Taliban are considered Combatants (which they are) then we are subject to the Geneva Convention and they should be treated within its bounds, this includes not mutilating their bodies in the event of death.

We also have the Unlawful Combatant status, but that is not applied to the Taliban Fighters like it has been to al-Qaeda operatives and that is a legal minefield to say the least.
Click to expand...

Article 2 does not apply to Iraq or Afghanistan any longer as there is an internationally recognised government in both, so only Article 3 applies now.

The highlighted bits you pasted for Article 3 only apply to live persons afaik and not dead ones.
Equally enemy Taliban do not fall under any of those definitions, they are not civilians, and they are also not members of armed forces due to lack of uniform
 
personaly id have just taken a photo of the dead guy as proof, but then im not a freaky little knife wilding maniac.

insert random rabble rabble comments about us and them muslim offence eye for an eye etc......
 
Efour2 said:
personaly id have just taken a photo of the dead guy as proof, but then im not a freaky little knife wilding maniac.

insert random rabble rabble comments about us and them muslim offence eye for an eye etc......
Click to expand...
You're being shot at - you don't have a camera, but you have a knife. Do you see the logic?
 
Efour2 said:
personaly id have just taken a photo of the dead guy as proof, but then im not a freaky little knife wilding maniac.

insert random rabble rabble comments about us and them muslim offence eye for an eye etc......
Click to expand...

and if you don't have a camera?
 
im being shot at last thing that matters is getting a reward but the saftey of me and my mates...

why wouldnt someone have a camera.... its 2010.. infact i wouldnt be suprised if its part of the required kit 1 per platoon. or something...

cutting off somones head is not the next logical step... unless you are a nutter.. which well i guess they are so oh well

they are british soldiers...they should behave like them
 
Efour2 said:
im being shot at last thing that matters is getting a reward but the saftey of me and my mates...
Click to expand...


it's not for a reward it's so they know the mission was successful, if you don't prove it you and your mates will be out again looking for a dread man and getting shot at again.



cutting off somones head is not the next logical step
Click to expand...

So if you don't have a camera what is your next logical step to prove you killed the right man?
 
you can't cut a mans head off with a camera.thats why they carry knives.it's their custom.if we use them in our army we have to respect their customs in the same way we have it rammed down our throats that we have to respect the muslims customs.why can they live by their rules but we can't???
 
DNA test i dunno a finger?? or just soak a bit of cloth in blood.

maybe a sketch or a water colour, a collage made from spent ammo cases and blood.

If this was the right thing to do then there wouldnt be a bloody great military investigation...
 
Efour2 said:
DNA test i dunno a finger?? or just soak a bit of cloth in blood.
Click to expand...

And if you don't have dna to test it against? (which considering they wanted the whole body it seems unlikely they did)

And i don't know about you but I've certainly lost a fair bit of blood during the course of my life but it doesn't prove I'm dead.

also why is cutting of a different body part acceptable?
 
Tefal said:
And if you don't have dna to test it against? (which considering they wanted the whole body it seems unlikely they did)

And i don't know about you but I've certainly lost a fair bit of blood during the course of my life but it doesn't prove I'm dead.

also why is cutting of a different body part acceptable?
Click to expand...

im only reading the paper man, it says he was mutilated so as it could be DNA tested later (about halfway thru artcle)

i dont quite think proving he was dead would be hard if you and 16 mates inc your officers saw it.

well i dunno if its acceptable either tbh they seem to be very fussy about the entire body intact or parts recovered..

if you cant see the difference between me cutting off a head or a pinky finger then lol sorry see a psychiatrist :D
 
gettothechopper said:
they have cameras, as well as several other excellent means of identification

head removal is not one of them
Click to expand...

What other means is there, apart from the camera that is.

This is the new Vietnam, we will try and fight by the politicians rules and loose, It is this exact sort of situation the Taliban will use to exploit us and beat us, I mean look at the views in this post, if it does the same to the politicians you have divided them, which in turn creates weakness in all future directives. You can not win this war using conventional techniques i am afraid.

Here is my prediction, We will stick to fighting using the RoE etc, it will carry on pretty much as it is now. The politicians will declare some sort of moral victory and announce a staged withdrawl. We will leave and the poor country will be in a worse state than before we went in(Which only happened because the Yanks did not like been on the recieving end of terrorism, Different when it was the IRA with us)

I say fair play to the lad, might not be right but he had to make a split second call.
 
How dare they do this to the Gurkha. They are fearless fighters who have served our country bravely & without question. He did his duty and destroyed the enemy.

I suppose we should recall every soldier who unloaded his assault rifle at the enemy as well. Oh and recall all Air Force pilots who dropped ordnance at enemy vehicles.

WTH is wrong with us! Dang political "correctness" invading the battlefield now. Maybe we should give our troops ammo made of cotton candy with "sorry" written on the front?
 
Last edited:
I'm not posting this vid to cause any offence, purely just to show how quick it could have been (1:19 to 1:20)

It probably took less time to take his head than it would have taken to pull out a camera and take a photo (if he had a camera that is), and remember that this guy is coming under heavy fire according to the report.

The gurkha did as he was ordered, i.e obtain proof of ID...not only did he do that, but he also obtained DNA evidence.

Had he left the body intact in order to go back for it after the firefight it would have most likely been removed before they got there.

It's also highly probable that had he taken the time to move the entire body, during the firefight, there would have been a greater risk of either himself or his squad getting killed.

He was obviously thinking on his feet.

Ignore the annoying fat bloke...

 
KatanaDV20 said:
How dare they do this to the Gurkha. They are fearless fighters who have served our country bravely & without question. He did his duty and destroyed the enemy.

I suppose we should recall every soldier who unloaded his assault rifle at the enemy as well. Oh and recall all Air Force pilots who dropped ordnance at enemy vehicles.

WTH is wrong with us! Dang political "correctness" invading the battlefield now. Maybe we should give our troops ammo made of cotton candy with "sorry" written on the front?
Click to expand...

Words fail me.
 
Duggan said:
Do the Taliban follow the rules of the Geneva convention then?
Click to expand...

Irrelevant.

Just because our enemy doesn't follow the rules that we believe in doesn't mean that we shouldn't either.

By your rationale we should be using suicide bombers and IEDs. After all, that's what our enemy is doing, right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom