Why is "engaging an insurgent" now murder?

[Thatcherite]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19918398
It's going to be a little tricky if our troops are not allowed to shoot the enemy!
I know, they can use firm but fair language. "I say chaps, would you mind awfully not shooting at us as we have some strange rules of engagement that means we are going to have to put you all in detention". That'll sort the Taliban! Being a soldier is almost as bad as being a school teacher these days.

[sandyRoe]

Imagine, if you can, that this insurgent was in their custody and unarmed.

[THECORBYLOON]

What are these "strange rules of engagement" then?

[bazwillrun]

We are mugs and this is another example of it.

we are more interested in showing everbody how upright we are and how we play by the rules, yet the scum we are fighting............Pfffttt

[emmie]

baz but if it was the killing of an unarmed man in custody, then wouldn't that make the soldiers as bad. Let us wait and see what the rest of the news brings on this, as we can only second guess what happened.

[Snafu03]

well the news reports doesnt give the scenario so theres no point guessing. As the report states our rules of engagement are not made public. I imagine it to be akin the the humourous poster - 'credit will only be given to those over 85 accompanied by both grandparents'.

[Gromit]

Welcome back R1G.

Our troops have engaged the enemy thousands of times in Afghanistan, but for some reason we do not know yet, this incident was different. My guess is that the man who was alledgely murdered was captive when he was killed and that clearly is wrong.

[Gromit]

Apparently, there have been 126 investigations of British soldiers in Afghanistan.

http://www.guardian.c...n-british-army-crimes

[jake-the-peg]

Given the limited information at the moment jumping to such conclusions shows a very marked lack of imagination.

We *might* for example be dealing with the execution of a prisoner

This has been taboo since the middle ages - not simply because of ideas like rules of war (which Geezer and Baz would doublessly scorn) but more practically because it invites retaliation in kind.

Certain right wing views are distinctly asymetrical - If the enemy were to execute captred British prisoners they would scream for nuclear retaliation but would be instant appologists for "our" troops should they do such a thing.


We should definately wait for more details but I'd like to ask the OP and his supporters whether they will continue to support these soldiers if it does turn out that they did execute a prisoner

[TTG]

Sorry Thatcherite...off topic comment but your avatar is a superb rock album.

[Old_Geezer]

I'm unsure of the details, but I suspect any minor incident would have been 'swept inder the carpet' and hushed up. If someone in authority thought there was enough of a case to answer, then the suspected action must have been well beyond what was considered acceptable in wartime.

[McMouse]

Just before we withdrew from Aden a known terrorist was found dead with a wood chisel buried in his back. It was written up by the patrol that found him 'as a case of suicide'.

[andy-hughes]

Thatcherite - as you can see from the responses, this incident is clearly not as cut and dried as simply shooting people who are shooting at the soldiers, which couold be aligned under a self-defence argument, which opens an alternate thread about what UK soliders are doing there to be shot at in the first place.

But that is a separate argument.

The issue here clearly involves action which is seen as not being within the 'rules of war' - how I love these tortological labels the MOD comes up with!

Doubtless more will be revealed, although that will be limited by the need to conceal from the Taliban the specific rules that govern actions of allied forces.

That's not a problem for the Taliban - they don't do 'rules'. well, perhaps one all-encompassing rule - 'See invader - shoot invader'.

[youngmafbog]

Ah yes, the Taliban are only defending their country. Hmmm

[bazwillrun]

I take it it we can assume that the "commander" of this insurgent will be thanking us for taking the trouble to thoroughly investigate the matter

[anotheoldgit]

THECORBYLOON

/// What are these "strange rules of engagement" then? ///

Well I know a few, but one has to be very careful what one divulges on internet sites such as this, enough said that our troops along with our police are fighting with one arm tied behind their backs

But believe me if you knew just a few they may make your hair curl, or perhaps not in certain circumstances.

[anotheoldgit]

jake-the-peg

/// not simply because of ideas like rules of war (which Geezer and Baz would doublessly scorn) but more practically because it invites retaliation in kind. ///

Inviting retaliation? Do you seriously think that the Taliban would break the rules of war, if we were seen to do so?

Get in the real world the Taliban and such are not interested in rules, are you naive enough to think that if they managed to capture one of ours they would treat him humanly, no after much torture they would most likely remove his head and place it on a
pole.

/// Certain right wing views are distinctly asymetrical - If the enemy were to execute captred British prisoners they would scream for nuclear retaliation but would be instant appologists for "our" troops should they do such a thing. ///

If the enemy were to execute captured prisoners?????

They do not wait to capture them, they pretend to be friendly towards our troops and then execute them.

How is it you never get the Left Wing up in arms about these cowedly acts?

I cannot understand why the Left are so anti- British, they along with their bible the Guardian give very little support to our troops, and are ready to cry them down at every possible opportunity, take Grommet's Guardian link for example.

If this country could rid itself of these Left wing radicals, this country would be a much better country.

[sandyRoe]

It appears that there are some Marines who would know how to deal with those Left-Wingers.