BBC Panorama- SAS
- Thread starter mudman
- Start date
Pellet Pinger
Well-Known Member
Yep, refuse to watch it, a new low.
I. Farticus
Well-Known Member
Unless the allegations are true
I read an article about this earlier today. Some of the reports make for interesting reading. Not just the journalistic license.
Bo Diddley
Well-Known Member
Who cares tbh, they are doing a job, a good job by all accounts!
Woodsmoke
Well-Known Member
I couldn't care less, to be honest. Vermin need exterminated. We're perfectly happy to let these lads risk their lives to fight terrorism, and then consider it ok to question how they do it? As far as I'm concerned they can crack on and get the job done. What the f*ck gives the BBC or anyone else the right to challenge them? Terrorists don't fight fair, why the hell should the SAS? They're special forces, not bloody social workers
The problem with some of the above comments is the timing and general optics that at best demonstrate a certain inconsistency in our morale compass IMHO. The key issue being that if the claims are true such a policy would constitute a “war crime”. And at a time when the West has not shrunk from condemning Russia for just such acts against Ukraine.
My point being that if we believe anything is permissible in defence of the realm when its our troops on the front line this must surely undermine any suggestion of unfair tactics in other theatres of war.
And if not what am I missing?
K
My point being that if we believe anything is permissible in defence of the realm when its our troops on the front line this must surely undermine any suggestion of unfair tactics in other theatres of war.
And if not what am I missing?
K
enfieldspares
Well-Known Member
The problem is that in 1945 and afterwards we hanged members of the German miltary and German police for doing pretty near what is supposedly being alleged now. Hitler's "Commando Order" and other actions by his cohorts in occupied France, occuied Belgium and elsewhere against civilian "members of the resistance".
War is never very pleasant and "irregular war" and "insurgency" is never ever pleasant and there will have been people in Afghanistan on the other side who did, and are doing, just as worse. Let it be. If you can't prosecute what "the enemy" did and is clearly still doing then don't then prosecute our side for what we did. It's not right but it's what's fair.
www.independent.co.uk
What is alleged isn't Oradour sur Glane, nor even My Lai but it needs stamping on and stamping on firmly. This is BAD leadership and control from the officers and senior NCOs. All those implicated and all those in directly above chain of command need to be RTU'd pronto. Today. Now. If not then by this weekend. For silence gives consent and ultimately put at risk the lives of your own men if then captured.
War is never very pleasant and "irregular war" and "insurgency" is never ever pleasant and there will have been people in Afghanistan on the other side who did, and are doing, just as worse. Let it be. If you can't prosecute what "the enemy" did and is clearly still doing then don't then prosecute our side for what we did. It's not right but it's what's fair.
Taliban admits it killed Afghan comedian after video showing capture and murder go viral
The men have been arrested and will be tried in a Taliban court, said a spokesperson of the insurgent group
www.independent.co.uk
What is alleged isn't Oradour sur Glane, nor even My Lai but it needs stamping on and stamping on firmly. This is BAD leadership and control from the officers and senior NCOs. All those implicated and all those in directly above chain of command need to be RTU'd pronto. Today. Now. If not then by this weekend. For silence gives consent and ultimately put at risk the lives of your own men if then captured.
Last edited:
I would agree, but when innocent people are being murdered, many when they had their hands restrained behind them, something is wrong !
I remember seeing the pictures from Ukraine, of innocent people found, their hands bound behind them, shot in the head. I know how angry it made me feel.
And now, it appears that the SAS were doing something very similar, in Afghanistan, and planting weapons to cover up the practise.
These were not Taliban, but young teenagers, and anyone who could carry a rifle. It appears to have been standard practise. One man had eight members of his family killed in one night !
I hope the people concerned, get EXACTLY what they deserve. This was murder, and we should hold ourselves to a higher standard.
enfieldspares
Well-Known Member
I got lambasted at my local clay club two months ago. There was a report that young Russian soldiers had entered a house and shot dead all the male civilian occupants and one of the clay club members was saying how bad this was.
I replied that maybe shortly before gunfire had come from that house, or an anti-tank rocket from its garden, and killed or immolated the "comrades" of those young Russian soldiers in the truck or tank in front of them. So their response was to deploy to neutralise the threat and then make the area safe.
And, as I explained, if everyone in the house claimed it wasn't them that fired the shot or launched the HEAT round from the garden...yet most in the house are men of "military age" what do you think those Russian soldiers are going to do?
"Well," was the reply was that it was still not right as, "These Russians were invaders".
This is not much far removed from that. What does anyone think is going to be the outcome? If soldiers passing by get shot from a house at what are they expected to do? Knock on the door and share a cup of tea?
It is the nub of it. You bear arms openly you may, just, perhaps be treated by the strict letter of the laws of war. Even though, as Churchill supposedly said, your surrendering to avoid being killed is trying to now stop your enemy doing to you what just before that moment what exactly you were trying to do to them.
But if instead you use those arms and then deny having done so and cast away those arms and any other thing that identifies you as having taken oart in that firefight or ambush? Then by the strict custom of those laws of war you can be summarily shot.
It is what has been reality since the time of rifled muskets and what are now called "unlawful combatants" and once were called "Francs Tireurs". It's not pleasant, it's not fair. It's not "right". But it is how it always ever was.
I replied that maybe shortly before gunfire had come from that house, or an anti-tank rocket from its garden, and killed or immolated the "comrades" of those young Russian soldiers in the truck or tank in front of them. So their response was to deploy to neutralise the threat and then make the area safe.
And, as I explained, if everyone in the house claimed it wasn't them that fired the shot or launched the HEAT round from the garden...yet most in the house are men of "military age" what do you think those Russian soldiers are going to do?
"Well," was the reply was that it was still not right as, "These Russians were invaders".
This is not much far removed from that. What does anyone think is going to be the outcome? If soldiers passing by get shot from a house at what are they expected to do? Knock on the door and share a cup of tea?
It is the nub of it. You bear arms openly you may, just, perhaps be treated by the strict letter of the laws of war. Even though, as Churchill supposedly said, your surrendering to avoid being killed is trying to now stop your enemy doing to you what just before that moment what exactly you were trying to do to them.
But if instead you use those arms and then deny having done so and cast away those arms and any other thing that identifies you as having taken oart in that firefight or ambush? Then by the strict custom of those laws of war you can be summarily shot.
It is what has been reality since the time of rifled muskets and what are now called "unlawful combatants" and once were called "Francs Tireurs". It's not pleasant, it's not fair. It's not "right". But it is how it always ever was.
Last edited:
Moral compass or Morale compass.
I would think Morale to be pretty high.
I would think Morale to be pretty high.
404Shooter
Well-Known Member
There may be an element of truth in these allegations but I’m sure both the BBC and their sources have performed their public duty and made the evidence available to the police. Or have they just forwarded an unsubstantiated ‘dossier’ to the MOD, in the safe knowledge that the CPS wouldn’t entertain the lack of hard evidence? As an aside though, why is it journalists’ sources are always unnamed?
Remember though, these are the same journalists who shamelessly rush to gain ‘embed’ status on operations to further their own careers; who encourage soldiers in rear areas to talk “off the record” (bribe is such an ugly word) about combat ops about which both parties have a very limited knowledge; who beg for the always limited helicopter support to fly them around the AO like VIPs (so they don’t have to stay out for too long, and thus forcing combat supplies, reinforcements and mail to move by road...), and who not so long ago happily quoted (and facilitated) Phil Shiner and his repulsive, reptilian associates.
I’ve had to host journalists on operations on a number of occasions and I have yet to meet one (of just under one hundred) whom I’d trust. Of the two organisations, I’d genuinely rather take tea with the local taliban (other varieties are available) than any so-called reporter. That said, I’d like to be a fly on the wall when the next BBC (other varieties are available) journalist turns up for his or her first ‘embedded’ meeting with troops on operations.
Remember though, these are the same journalists who shamelessly rush to gain ‘embed’ status on operations to further their own careers; who encourage soldiers in rear areas to talk “off the record” (bribe is such an ugly word) about combat ops about which both parties have a very limited knowledge; who beg for the always limited helicopter support to fly them around the AO like VIPs (so they don’t have to stay out for too long, and thus forcing combat supplies, reinforcements and mail to move by road...), and who not so long ago happily quoted (and facilitated) Phil Shiner and his repulsive, reptilian associates.
I’ve had to host journalists on operations on a number of occasions and I have yet to meet one (of just under one hundred) whom I’d trust. Of the two organisations, I’d genuinely rather take tea with the local taliban (other varieties are available) than any so-called reporter. That said, I’d like to be a fly on the wall when the next BBC (other varieties are available) journalist turns up for his or her first ‘embedded’ meeting with troops on operations.
