PDA

View Full Version : Should US soldier who killed 16 civilians in Afganistan be tried by Afghan courts?




Massachusetts
03-13-2012, 10:22 AM
I've been wondering this for the past day. Should the US soldier who killed 16 civilians in Afghanistan be tried by the Afghan courts?

I've heard a lot of animosity against this stance because of setting a bad precedence.

But..wouldn't we as American citizens be outraged if somebody from another country came to America and shot and killed 16 Americans including women and children and want him to be tried in the American courts? I think it's hypocritical to just allow him to just evade the Afghanistan justice system.

Anti Federalist
03-13-2012, 10:28 AM
As much as it would be a given that the Afghans would shred this guy, and that's probably what's deserved, I can't agree.

Due process is due process, and trying US citizens in foreign courts sets a huge bad precedent.

dean.engelhardt
03-13-2012, 10:36 AM
As much as it would be a given that the Afghans would shred this guy, and that's probably what's deserved, I can't agree.

Due process is due process, and trying US citizens in foreign courts sets a huge bad precedent.

Why should Americans have a different standard than any other nationality. If a visiting Afghan soldier went on a killing spree in a U.S. town, are we OK turning him over to his superiors?

Anti Federalist
03-13-2012, 10:43 AM
Why should Americans have a different standard than any other nationality. If a visiting Afghan soldier went on a killing spree in a U.S. town, are we OK turning him over to his superiors?

In a perfect world, there would be no visiting Afghan soldier.

National sovereignty issues are raised here, I am not going to jump on a bandwagon that would start going down the road of international or multinational jurisdictions and tribunals.

Is it justice, in this case?

Probably not.

The fact is, we shouldn't have been there in the first place.

pcosmar
03-13-2012, 10:44 AM
As much as it would be a given that the Afghans would shred this guy, and that's probably what's deserved, I can't agree.

Due process is due process, and trying US citizens in foreign courts sets a huge bad precedent.

I have to disagree. And the Principle is also in our 6th Amendment. Though Afghanistan does not have our constitution,, it does have the Laws of their land.


In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense

A foreigner in this land would be subject to our laws and courts.

A foreigner in another land would be subject to the Law of that land.

fisharmor
03-13-2012, 10:46 AM
This man's only crime was not waiting until he was back here wearing a blue uniform instead of camo.
If he had waited, this wouldn't have been a big deal.

camp_steveo
03-13-2012, 10:49 AM
SOFA

According to the agreement, US service members will not be tried by host nations.

thoughtomator
03-13-2012, 10:51 AM
this guy will get more due process at this point in an Afghan court than a US court

NDAA - your rights are history

pcosmar
03-13-2012, 10:52 AM
National Sovereignty

Respect is not a one way street.

Anti Federalist
03-13-2012, 10:52 AM
I have to disagree. And the Principle is also in our 6th Amendment. Though Afghanistan does not have our constitution,, it does have the Laws of their land.


A foreigner in this land would be subject to our laws and courts.

A foreigner in another land would be subject to the Law of that land.

A valid point, and the defense of my point is weak, because I feel, frankly, dirty doing so.

I just hate to get in a situation where foreign courts have jurisdiction over US citizens, no matter reprehensible their actions might be.

But I suppose you are right, if one of us had gone on a killing spree in say, Mexico, or Germany, we would be cooling our heels in their prison right now.

Anti Federalist
03-13-2012, 10:53 AM
This man's only crime was not waiting until he was back here wearing a blue uniform instead of camo.
If he had waited, this wouldn't have been a big deal.

Truth.

ClydeCoulter
03-13-2012, 10:58 AM
SOFA

According to the agreement, US service members will not be tried by host nations.

Did Afghanistan sign the agreement according to their rules of agreements? Didn't find it online.

camp_steveo
03-13-2012, 10:59 AM
Did Afghanistan sign the agreement according to their rules of agreements? Didn't find it online.

Yes, US military always operates under SOFA.


It also emerged that the sergeant, who is being questioned at a US base in Kandahar, will not face trial in Afghanistan for the murders, because of America’s Status of Forces Agreement with Afghanistan.

In the contract, which it holds with foreign countries it operates in, the American military make a deal on what rules govern US troops and how local law will be applied to them.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/rogue-us-soldier-disguised-himself-in-afghan-759646

TheTexan
03-13-2012, 10:59 AM
If we were at war with Afghanistan, I'd say U.S. courts. But we're not. They have jurisdiction.

ClydeCoulter
03-13-2012, 11:00 AM
This is why all nations should stay out of "Entangling alliences", dang it!

We attack, put in a puppet, they sign an agreement.........who gets hurt, governments or people?

camp_steveo
03-13-2012, 11:01 AM
I've been deployed twice. Both times we were briefed on SOFA.

AFPVet
03-13-2012, 11:02 AM
Well, a couple of issues are raised here. 1. This is a military member and the property of the U.S. Government. 2. He was in a foreign country... if he were a civilian, he might be punished by the host country since this is what happened in China—remember the dude who egged a car in Singapore and we let the Chinese spank him?

oyarde
03-13-2012, 11:16 AM
The precedent should not be set . We should not be in Afghanistan .Who did not see this coming ? really , guys on fourth , fifth , sixth deployments ,sadly , I expected this prior , innocent , sleeping women and children , sickening.

Pericles
03-13-2012, 11:26 AM
A valid point, and the defense of my point is weak, because I feel, frankly, dirty doing so.

I just hate to get in a situation where foreign courts have jurisdiction over US citizens, no matter reprehensible their actions might be.

But I suppose you are right, if one of us had gone on a killing spree in say, Mexico, or Germany, we would be cooling our heels in their prison right now.

If it makes you feel any better .......

Frequently, US troops stationed in Germany would be tried by German courts when the victim was a German citizen (including murder cases), as there was no question that the accused would have a fair trial.

Afghanistan only has the justice system it has (and how many on this board would care to be subject to it) because of the US military - and SOFA goes with that.

Pericles
03-13-2012, 11:28 AM
The precedent should not be set . We should not be in Afghanistan .Who did not see this coming ? really , guys on fourth , fifth , sixth deployments ,sadly , I expected this prior , innocent , sleeping women and children , sickening.

Unfortunately, blowback goes both ways. When guys who are supposed to be allies decide to off a few infidels, the infidels may get a bit loopy and decide there are no allies and make a point that when life is so cheap, anybody can demand payment.

pcosmar
03-13-2012, 11:42 AM
National Sovereignty

Respect is not a one way street.

I am surprised as some responses.

What part of National Sovereignty do you not understand?
Or does it only apply to some?
And why does it only apply to some?

We should not be there. Period. Being there is not an excuse.

Feeding the Abscess
03-13-2012, 12:06 PM
This man's only crime was not waiting until he was back here wearing a blue uniform instead of camo.
If he had waited, this wouldn't have been a big deal.

He should have waited until they left their houses so he could snipe them, he'd have received a book deal and national TV interviews.

Soca Taliban
03-13-2012, 12:40 PM
He should be tried by their courts....

JK/SEA
03-13-2012, 12:57 PM
Here...this should give you some insight of what will probably happen,

http://asianhistory.about.com/b/2009/08/22/former-lt-calley-apologizes-for-my-lai.htm

Agorism
03-13-2012, 01:06 PM
It's a Psyche case.

Voluntary Man
03-13-2012, 01:28 PM
As much as it would be a given that the Afghans would shred this guy, and that's probably what's deserved, I can't agree.

Due process is due process, and trying US citizens in foreign courts sets a huge bad precedent.

I must disagree. When US citizens commit crimes against foreign people on foreign soil, they should be tried in foreign courts, if the possibility of a fair trial exists. The best precedent we could set would be to let the Afghanis try him/them, if "we" are sincere about preventing this from happening again.

Read 'The Prince.'

sailingaway
03-13-2012, 01:32 PM
I toyed between other and US military. Other being US civilian because I think the guy was nuts. But as a matter of precedent we really can't have our soldiers be tried under civilian law of an occupied country. However, we shouldn't be there at all, and those having us there have responsibility for this. We can debate where THEY should be tried, if you like....

pcosmar
03-13-2012, 01:36 PM
he should be tuned over to the witnesses and family of the victims.
Let them exercise "due process" upon him.

His entire chain of command should be immediately recalled and Court Marshaled.

Voluntary Man
03-13-2012, 01:37 PM
In the contract, which it holds with foreign countries it operates in, the American military make a deal on what rules govern US troops and how local law will be applied to them.

Really? So, Bush made a deal with Afghanistan, before he invaded it, that our troops wouldn't be held accountable for any crimes against Afghanis? Who signed that?

Domalais
03-13-2012, 01:39 PM
Really? So, Bush made a deal with Afghanistan, before he invaded it, that our troops wouldn't be held accountable for any crimes against Afghanis? Who signed that?

The government we had just installed, of course.

Voluntary Man
03-13-2012, 01:39 PM
BTW, it'll never happen. Obama would get crucified in the general election. So, forget it.

Voluntary Man
03-13-2012, 01:46 PM
I toyed between other and US military. Other being US civilian because I think the guy was nuts. But as a matter of precedent we really can't have our soldiers be tried under civilian law of an occupied country. However, we shouldn't be there at all, and those having us there have responsibility for this. We can debate where THEY should be tried, if you like....

Does the Boston Massacre ring a bell?


As I recall, our second president defended those foreign soldiers in civilian court.

Demigod
03-13-2012, 01:59 PM
What I would like is the USA government to admit what they are there and that is OCCUPIERS than tell the Afghan puppet government to shut up just before executing 10 000 random people to prove who is boss.

I have no trouble with empires and occupiers,both come and go and sooner or later you are the one that is occupied.But I simply can not stand the we are the good guys farce.

If the USA wants to be an Empire than go ahead attack,pillage,colonize,kill and torture but then don't act all surprised when the "third world savages" strike back.

flightlesskiwi
03-13-2012, 02:07 PM
I still have a hard time believing the (current) official story that this man acted alone.

Guess it's just the conspiracy theorist in me...

camp_steveo
03-13-2012, 02:17 PM
Really? So, Bush made a deal with Afghanistan, before he invaded it, that our troops wouldn't be held accountable for any crimes against Afghanis? Who signed that?

It's called a Status of Forces Agreement and it doesn't say that US military service members won't be held accountable. It says they won't be held accountable by the host nation.

Do you think justice will not be served?

asurfaholic
03-13-2012, 02:25 PM
He should be assassinated. That there is a terrorist by anyone's standard..

I mean, its not like anyone here in the US gives a shit and a half about due process anyways.

pcosmar
03-13-2012, 02:25 PM
It's called a Status of Forces Agreement and it doesn't say that US military service members won't be held accountable. It says they won't be held accountable by the host nation.

Do you think justice will not be served?

Host nation?
Is that supposed to be a joke?

Can someone show me the invitation?

camp_steveo
03-13-2012, 02:30 PM
Host nation?
Is that supposed to be a joke?

Can someone show me the invitation?

No

it's the term used.

Voluntary Man
03-13-2012, 02:33 PM
It's called a Status of Forces Agreement and it doesn't say that US military service members won't be held accountable. It says they won't be held accountable by the host nation.

Do you think justice will not be served?

Lt. Calley served 3 years house arrest.

Voluntary Man
03-13-2012, 02:36 PM
Host nation?
Is that supposed to be a joke?

Can someone show me the invitation?

If Afghanistan is the host, then the US is the gate crasher.

Sounds about right.

pcosmar
03-13-2012, 02:41 PM
No

it's the term used.

Ah,, sort of like the French were host nation to the Germans.

pcosmar
03-13-2012, 02:42 PM
It Afghanistan is the host, the US is the gate crasher.

Sounds about right.

More like Afghanistan is the Host and the US is the parasite.

:(

camp_steveo
03-13-2012, 02:44 PM
Look, I am not making excuses or defending anyone.

I am telling you the facts.

We have an agreement and the service member, despite how heinous his alleged crimes are, will not be tried in that God forsaken hell hole.

carterm
03-13-2012, 02:45 PM
ron paul should say this

"so let me get this straight. we pee on their corpses, burn their holy texts, and massacre their women and children, and we expect not to incite hatred, and we expect them to not retaliate? AMERICA FAIL!"

bunklocoempire
03-13-2012, 02:46 PM
Reminds me of the ethical use of stolen money. Hard to agonize over that one.

I don't even know where to start with this one. That's the problem with undeclared unjust wars using shit for strategy.

I would certainly hope all the opinions in this thread will consider the originating circumstances and "strategy" when sorting out the 'ethics' of this one.

http://s6.postimage.org/sq1tkpbap/wrong_tool_for_the_job_by_raresdk_d35viqj.jpg

camp_steveo
03-13-2012, 02:49 PM
We should have got OBL and AQ's top leaders and then got the hell outta Dodge.

If we would've done that this Army Sgt would probably have not snapped and we wouldn't even be discussing this.

Another reason to support Dr Paul's foreign policy plans.

pcosmar
03-13-2012, 02:50 PM
We have an agreement

What agreement? We are the invaders there. There was no agreement to being invaded.

That is like me bringing a crew to your home and shoving a gun in your face, and then saying we have an agreement as your wife is raped.

NO
It is a CRIME. The invasion was a crime,, all of the murders of Afghan people since that time are crimes.
There is no agreement. There is brute force.

Voluntary Man
03-13-2012, 03:13 PM
More like Afghanistan is the Host and the US is the parasite.

:(

I've been one-upped! :)

pcosmar
03-13-2012, 03:16 PM
I've been one-upped! :)

What?
You don't have an "agreement" with your tapeworm?

Voluntary Man
03-13-2012, 03:22 PM
Look, I am not making excuses or defending anyone.

I am telling you the facts.

We have an agreement and the service member, despite how heinous his alleged crimes are, will not be tried in that God forsaken hell hole.

With whom is this agreement? Not What. Who?

And, it seems to me that we, in this country, are in the habit of sentencing people to death or life in "hell holes," for just such crimes.....unless, as others have pointed out, the criminal is wearing a state-issued costume and brooch.

Pericles
03-13-2012, 03:23 PM
Probably someting similar should happen to him as happened to this guy:

http://www.boston.com/news/world/asia/articles/2011/04/28/afghan_pilot_kills_9_americans_at_nato_base/

Voluntary Man
03-13-2012, 03:24 PM
What?
You don't have an "agreement" with your tapeworm?

If only!

Voluntary Man
03-13-2012, 03:27 PM
What agreement? We are the invaders there. There was no agreement to being invaded.

That is like me bringing a crew to your home and shoving a gun in your face, and then saying we have an agreement as your wife is raped.

NO
It is a CRIME. The invasion was a crime,, all of the murders of Afghan people since that time are crimes.
There is no agreement. There is brute force.

"You must spread some
Reputation around before
giving it to pcosmar again."

camp_steveo
03-13-2012, 03:40 PM
Here is what I found after a little google "research"

The Government of Afghanistan recognizes the particular importance of disciplinary control by United States military authorities over United States personnel and, therefore, Afghanistan authorizes the United States Government to exercise criminal jurisdiction over United States personnel. The Government of Afghanistan and the Government of the United States of America confirm that such personnel may not be surrendered to, or otherwise transferred to, the custody of an international tribunal or any other entity or state without the express consent of the Government of the United States.

http://www.caaflog.com/2008/09/08/afghan-sofa-exclusive-ucmj-jurisdiction-under-review/

pcosmar
03-13-2012, 03:53 PM
Here is what I found after a little google "research"


"The Government of Afghanistan" is a puppet regime imposed by the invading army.
It is no more legitimate than the puppet government imposed by the Russians when they invaded.

The Government of Afghanistan is those guys in the hills of Afghanistan that will NEVER surrender.

The Government of Afghanistan is the Tribal Leaders and Village elders. It has ever been thus.

ClydeCoulter
03-13-2012, 03:57 PM
"You must spread some
Reputation around before
giving it to pcosmar again."
+rep to pcosmar on behalf of Voluntary Man

ClydeCoulter
03-13-2012, 04:30 PM
"The Government of Afghanistan" is a puppet regime imposed by the invading army.
It is no more legitimate than the puppet government imposed by the Russians when they invaded.

The Government of Afghanistan is those guys in the hills of Afghanistan that will NEVER surrender.

The Government of Afghanistan is the Tribal Leaders and Village elders. It has ever been thus.

^^^^ This, again and again, and again ^^^^

row333au
03-13-2012, 04:47 PM
http://rt.com/news/afghanistan-us-drunk-shooting-373/

flightlesskiwi
03-13-2012, 05:14 PM
http://rt.com/news/afghanistan-us-drunk-shooting-373/


"They were all drunk and shooting all over the place," Reuters cites Agha Lala, a villager in Kandahar's Panjwayi district.

Lala's neighbor Haji Samad lost all of his 11 relatives in the rampage, including children and grandchildren. He claims Marines “poured chemicals over their dead bodies and burned them.”

Twenty-year-old Jan Agha says the gunfire “shook him out of bed.” He was in the epicenter of the horrible shooting, witnessing his father shot as the latter peered out of a window to see what was going on.

"The Americans stayed in our house for a while. I was very scared," the young man told reporters.

Lying on a floor, Agha says, he pretended to be dead.

He added that his brother was shot in his head and chest. His sister was killed as well. “My mother was shot in her eye and her face. She was unrecognizable,” he said.


more and more, this is getting harder to bear.

i cannot fathom what the Afghans go through every single flipping day.

pcosmar
03-13-2012, 07:00 PM
"The Government of Afghanistan" is a puppet regime imposed by the invading army.
It is no more legitimate than the puppet government imposed by the Russians when they invaded.

The Government of Afghanistan is those guys in the hills of Afghanistan that will NEVER surrender.

The Government of Afghanistan is the Tribal Leaders and Village elders. It has ever been thus.

Wow.
The rep on this post makes no sense at all

Posted by Tyr
Nope, I leave that to pieces of shit like you. Uh oh lookout, there's a satanist outside your window! Better call Alex Jones and let him know!
but those grey ones don't count anyway.
LOL
:confused:

moderate libertarian
03-13-2012, 10:23 PM
Afghan justice system is crude. However it likely will an improvement over war crimes justice under Obama regime.



Saturday, February 4, 2012
US Drops All Charges For Soldier's 'Sport Killing' Case
NO TRIAL: Charges against Specialist Michael Wagnon II have been dropped. It was one of the most serious war-crimes cases to emerge from the Afghanistan war. Reuters


http://warnewsupdates.blogspot.com/2012/02/us-drops-all-charges-for-soldiers-sport.html


Afghanistan killing case leads to questions on military justice
MASSACRE: Prosecution collapses, opens criticism of "fog-of-war" defenses.
By CHARLIE SAVAGE and ELISABETH BUMILLER
The New York Times
Published: January 28th, 2012 10:19 PM

Read more here: http://www.adn.com/2012/01/28/2288878/afghanistan-killing-case-leads.html#storylink=cpy




Afghanistan suspect's base had 2010 killing case
9:14 PM, March 11, 2012 | Comments

JOINT BASE LEWIS-McCHORD, Wash. — A soldier suspected of killing 16 Afghan villagers today comes from Joint Base Lewis-McChord, one of the largest military installations in the U.S. — and one that has seen its share of controversies and violence in the past few years.

http://www.freep.com/article/20120311/NEWS07/120311030/Afghanistan-suspect-s-base-had-2010-killing-case?odyssey=nav%7Chead

moderate libertarian
03-14-2012, 10:55 PM
Obama seems to have flown him out of there:



Afghan shooting suspect flown out

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-17375761