Trial for American Soldier

 

"KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) — The American soldier accused of shooting 16 Afghan villagers in a pre-dawn killing spree was flown out of Afghanistan on Wednesday to an undisclosed location, even as many Afghans called for him to face justice in their country.

Afghan government officials did not immediately respond to calls for comment on the late-night announcement. The U.S. military said the transfer did not preclude the possibility of trying the case in Afghanistan, and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has said the soldier could receive capital punishment if convicted.

Many fear a misstep by the U.S. military in handling the case could ignite a firestorm in Afghanistan that would shatter already tense relations between the two countries. The alliance appeared near the breaking point last month when the burning of Qurans in a garbage pit at a U.S. base sparked protests and retaliatory attacks that killed more than 30 people, including six U.S. soldiers.

In recent days the two nations made headway toward an agreement governing a long-term American presence here, but the massacre in Kandahar province on Sunday has called all such negotiations into question.

Afghan lawmakers have demanded that the soldier be publicly tried in Afghanistan to show that he was being brought to justice, calling on President Hamid Karzai to suspend all talks with the U.S. until that happens." Story

US trial there? Or trial by Ge 16:12 dirty yak? De 16:20, Isa 56:1

See:

One World Government/Religion

 

"You can understand the Afghan's anger here..."

 

Of course.  It's horrible. 

 

"...[A]nd their demands are somewhat justified from their perspective.  Though I have little sympathy for the murderer, there's a better chance of him getting a fair trial in a US military court marshal than what he would face in an Afghan court."

 

If you encouraged your son or daughter to enlist in the military, what would you think of them being subjected to a backward,wicked culture for trial one day?  Pr 19:28, Mic 3:9, Isa 59:4, Isa 59:14, Lk 11:42, Job 12:4; Am 5:12.  The perversion of justice is bad enough in our country.  De 16:20, Isa 56:1.  We don't subject our men to trial by dirty yak there (Ge 16:12).

 

Response to comment [from an atheist]: "[W]ell it is a good thing he would be tried by Afghan people rather than animals then."

 

You trust their (Ge 16:12) system of justice (Pr 19:28, Mic 3:9, Isa 59:4, Isa 59:14, Lk 11:42, Job 12:4; Am 5:12) over our own (just a system [Enyart])?

Related:

Amina Filali, Morocco Rape Victim, Commits Suicide After Forced Marriage To Rapist

 

Response to comment [from a Christian]:  "Islam will execute him? Yeah, and? He committed murder."

 

We will probably do the same (Ge 9:5,6; Ex 21:12; Nu 35:16). Who should try him? You're already ready to submit to the One World Government & Religion? Ge 11:3-4, Re 13:17

 

Response to comment [from a pagan]:  "A military man[']s role has been changing for many years, and it is needed, by winning the people over it..."

 

Our soldiers won't win their hearts and minds (Ge 16:12). Are they there to kill the enemy (2 Sa 22:35) or talk over tea and crumpets?

Libs cannot run a war. Their political correctness gets our people killed.

 

Response to comment [from a Christian]:  "I think the soldier should be turned over. He committed an act of terrorism no different than the WTC attack."

 

No.

Why do you think Panetta doesn't trust our own troops with weapons near him? Distrust: Marines Disarmed for Panetta at Camp Leatherneck This is a leadership problem.

 

Response to comment [from a Christian]: "I agree there is a leadership problem. But that doesn't negate the fact of what CM said."

 

We'll have to wait and see what will happen.

[A look at military justice in Afghanistan killing case; soldier already had first hearing. AP] "...The defense lawyer will probably push for both the psychological evaluation and the hearings to convene outside of Afghanistan, Rinckey said. But the suspect definitely will be tried in a U.S. military court and likely in Afghanistan. Unlike a civilian who commits a crime in a foreign country and is subject to the laws of that country, there is a bilateral US-Afghan agreement that U.S. forces are immune from arrest and detention by Afghan authorities and instead fall under the jurisdiction of the U.S. military codes and judicial system." Full text: A look at military justice in Afghanistan killing case; soldier already had first hearing

[Accused soldier in Afghanistan shooting could face death penalty, plead insanity. Fox News] "...Though Afghanistan's parliament has called for the soldier to be tried in an Afghan court, he will likely be returned to the United States and face a general court-martial under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Pentagon investigators are mulling charges that could result in the death penalty if he is found guilty..." Full text: Accused soldier in Afghanistan shooting could face death penalty, plead insanity

 

Response to comment [from a Christian]: "I actually disagree here. I think when we send soldiers to foreign countries to fight, we can't consider them to be under the laws of those nations. That makes no kind of sense to me. I know we do it, but we really shouldn't. They should be under our laws while there, as if every step they take grants that spot of ground American sovereignty for as long as they stand on it, and as long as they are there as soldiers under our authority.

Otherwise, they're tourists, not soldiers under our authority. Doesn't that make more sense?"

 

I agree but I don't think we have the law on our side according to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. That is something to consider when enlisting under a wicked leader and going to a backward and perverse part of the world.

 

Response to comment [from a pagan]: "The UCMJ does not change when a new leader takes command!"

 

The agreement is between nations.

 

"We were not talking about an agreement.  You were talking about the UCMJ!  The UCMJ does not change when a new leader takes command!"

 

"...Chapter 47. Uniform Code of Military Justice...802. ART. 2. PERSONS SUBJECT TO THIS CHAPTER...(11) Subject to any treaty or agreement which the United States is or may be a party to any accepted rule of international law, persons serving with, employed by, or accompanying the armed forces outside the United States and outside the Canal Zone, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands." Source

"There's no lawyer. There's just you and me." ~ Jack Bauer

 

Response to comment [from a pagan]: "Try reading your link SD..."Major General Mark Gurganus later said he gave the order because Afghan troops attending the talk were unarmed and he wanted the policy to be consistent for all."

 

Yes, that's what he later said.

Sgt. Maj. Brandon Hall said "Somebody got itchy."

[Sgt. Maj. Brandon Hall said "Somebody got itchy."] "Read the entire statement SD and then try understanding the context, I know that would be difficult for you considering your limited ability!  "Marine Sgt. Maj. Brandon Hall announced that Marines should exit the tent and leave their rifles and pistols outside because "something has come to light.  Hall said later he did not know why the unusual order was given. American troops in war zones typically are seen armed when U.S. officials visit.  Somebody got itchy," Hall said. "All I know is, I was told to get the weapons out." http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/world_now/2012/03/troops-in-afghanistan-told-to-leave-guns-outside-panettas-tent.html

Who got "itchy" and why? Panetta? The soldiers? Marines have never been asked to give up their weapons before when a Sec Def comes to visit: "US troops often remain armed even when their Afghan colleagues have been asked to lay down their weapons and the incident is believed to be the first time they were stripped of guns during an address by their own secretary of defense..." Full text: Soldiers asked to disarm during Leon Panetta speech in Afghanistan by Raf Sanchez

Response to comment [from a Christian]: "Much as it worries me to back this murder in any way shape or form.  He needs to be tried by the American military in accordance with the agreements already made.  Not for his benefit, but because it sets a precedent, the agreement is there so US soldiers in a combat situation are not faced with spurious, unreasonable and politically motivated accusations from local law enforcement..."

Americans should think twice before committing a crime in a dirty, rat land (Ge 16:12)--or any other land for that matter:

Here's what happened in Korea according to R. Chuck Mason, Legislative Attorney: "[Footnote 88: ...[A] servicemember was implicated in the murder of a female Korean national which occurred off post in the Republic of Korea. Pursuant to the provisions of the SOFA, the Korean Minister of Justice notified the Commander, United States Forces, Korea, that the Korean Government intended to exercise its primary right of jurisdiction over the servicemember on charges of murder and arson...

[Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA): What Is It, and How Has It Been Utilized? by R. Chuck Mason, Legislative Attorney] ...[T]he servicemember asserted that the Constitution and the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) provide the sole methods for trying servicemen abroad and that they can not be changed by an executive agreement. The court held that the premise is true only when there has not been a violation of the laws of the foreign jurisdiction. When a violation of the foreign jurisdiction’s criminal laws occurs, the primary jurisdiction lies with that nation and the provisions of the UCMJ only apply if the foreign nation expressly or impliedly waived its jurisdiction. In support of its decision the court cited the principle, stated in Wilson, that the primary right of jurisdiction belongs to the nation in whose territory the servicemember commits the crime..." Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA): What Is It, and How Has It Been Utilized? Source

I don't know what our agreement is with Afghanistan. I would hope that we would fight to keep him under U.S. jurisdiction. But think about the climate here in the U.S. We are actually considering using Sharia Law in our own courts (Isa 5:20).

See:

One World Government/Religion

"He was not following orders..."

From a Commander-in-Chief who apologizes for our Judeo-Christian nation? What did Obama mean by a surge and a pull-out and by the way; I won't get behind the war effort?

Response to comment [from a pagan]:  "Sorry but after 21.5 years in the Marine Corps of which 2.5 yrs were in combat, I can not condone or excuse the actions of a murderer whether in a war or not. Too many good men have experienced the horrors of combat honorably! I will not dishonor their actions by accepting the excuse someone snapped....you want to snap, go find armed insurgents and do your thing!"

Thank you for your service to our country.

Our "friends" who our men trained had been killing them. How can you tell who's who? The enemy there does not wear a uniform.

Samson killed thirty men having do doubt that they were the enemy (Judges 14:19): "Jdg 14:19 his anger. God blesses the one who had been wronged. Samson’s anger may be legitimate—righteous indignation against deceit (cf. Mark 3:5). The battle with the men at Ashkelon, about 23 mi. away, was a part of the war between Israel and Philistia."
mi. mile/miles
MacArthur, John Jr: The MacArthur Study Bible. electronic ed. Nashville : Word Pub., 1997, c1997, S. Jdg 14:19

Response to comment [from other]: "...[Y]ou call Afghans "dirty yaks?"

Laura Ingraham used to refer to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed as "hairy back guy" or dirty yak". I have borrowed this term from her to refer to unregenerate men in that region (Ge 16:12).

We know how you like to make us all out to be the same.

[No One Comes to Christ…Unless John 6 by John MacArthur] "...Unregenerate people are dead in sin (Eph. 2:1; Col. 2:13), slaves to unrighteousness (John 8:34; Rom. 6:6, 17, 20), alienated from God (Col. 1:21), and hostile to Him (Rom. 5:10; 8:7). They are spiritually blind (2 Cor. 4:4) captives (2 Tim. 2:26) trapped in Satan’s kingdom (Col. 1:13), powerless to change their sinful natures (Jer. 13:23; Rom. 5:6), unable to please God (Rom. 8:8), and incapable of understanding spiritual truth (1 Cor. 2:14; cf. John 14:17). Although the human will is involved in coming to Christ (since no one is saved apart from believing the gospel—Mark 1:15; Acts 15:7; Rom. 1:16; 10:9–15; Eph. 1:13)..." Full text: No One Comes to Christ…Unless John 6 by John MacArthur

"You must have missed these simple questions..." [Out of curiosity, what would you say if an Afghan nutter soldier went on a shooting spree killing 30 people here in the US? Where would you think he should be put on trial?]

Here. We respect law and order. They do not. Gen. 25:23

We know how you believe that we are all the same (Ge 11:3-4, Re 13:17).

Response to comment [from a pagan]: "The UCMJ does not change when a new leader takes command!"

That's nice. :freak:

[The enemy there does not wear a uniform.] "Add that to my comment " the enemy is the one shooting at you" and you have your answer!"

By that time you're dead. The "friends" they'd been training shot them execution style.

Is that your plan? Wait until you have a bullet in your head to fire?

[Under Obama, Rules of Engagement in Afghan War Are Extreme Political Correctness Which Slow Down US Troops by Marc Schenker] "Under the Obama Administration, the rules of engagement in the Afghan War are extreme political correctness, and this has brought well-earned criticism of the military's prosecution of the Afghan War from a very decorated source, Major General Robert Scales. Imagine if you're a Marine in Afghanistan, charged with fighting terrorists, yet you can't shoot at Taliban terrorists unless you see them actually holding weapons in their hands! If the Taliban terrorists only temporarily put their arms down, Marines are forbidden from shooting at them! Imagine that you also can't treat the captured terrorists "roughly"—as in using "harsh" language against them that may hurt their little, wittle, terrorist feelings—and that you must release your terrorist foe after 96 hours if you don't hand them over to the Afghan police. Think this is a bad dream, a cruel joke or simply a liberal's wildest fantasy come true? Think again, for this is actual war policy going on in Afghanistan right now under Obama..." Full text: Under Obama, Rules of Engagement in Afghan War Are Extreme Political Correctness Which Slow Down US Troops

Response to comment [from an atheist]: "...[P]lease tell me you are not being serious with your racism."

What do you mean by "racist"? Ac 17:26. Some people are wild a's'ses as we were told they would be (Ge 16:12). That does not mean ******* (expletive). It means wild donkey or warlike people among men. You've not noticed this yet? People inherit different characterizes (Gen. 25:23). Do you deny this?

"No one has said that the rules for engagement are easy to follow..."

They're so hard to follow when you're dead.

"...[B]ut they are there..."

"...and if violated you can and may find yourself in court!"

Note to self: When you go to war--in a place like Afghanistan, no less; be sure to serve under a Commander-in-Chief who is for you. Be sure you're going to win.

Response to comment [from a Christian]: "Have you read about Mogadishu?"

Charming people aren't they? Ge 16:12.

"If our diversity becomes a casualty, I think that's worse (General Casey)."

Response to comment [from an agnostic]:  "...[P]lease cease this errant tangent. After all, 2000 years ago my [G]erman/[C]eltic ancestors were still painting themselves blue and burning human sacrifices in wicker men, while my [G]reek/[J]ew ancestors had writing, philosophy, science and complex architecture. The latter may have been 'superior' at the time but that doesn't mean the former peoples could eventually become great.

The [A]rabs/all peoples of the [M]iddle-[E]ast I consider a highly intelligent people. Before too much religion got in the way[,] they were fantastic contributors of science. Look at how devoted some of them are to religion, memorizing the whole [K]oran, praying many times a day. If they could but channel their energy back into science and philosophy they would truly own the world."

Do you have a point?

You asked me if I am a racist. I prefer the term "people group" to "race". We are one race--the human race (Ac 17:26).

On what basis do you claim that I am a racist? God hates racism, abortion, etc. Zech 8:17, Pr 6:16-17.

"I didn't ask if you were racist."

I'm sorry.  That was Woopah's statement.

"I don't believe 'people groups' can be genetically flawed either, if that's what you prefer to call them. You do not acquire war-like characteristics within the womb of you mother."

God makes it clear that nations and people inherit separate characteristics (Gen. 25:23).

See:

 Genesis 25:19-23 Morris

Response to comment [from an agnostic]: "God makes it clear that we fashion our own character before him. it is not really inherited. I am different from my brother because of choices he made about what he wants to do or become."

To have wisdom you need to be able to recognize patterns in this world (Prager).

Trial for American Soldier