Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

shasolenzabi wrote:Now, why not wait until the man is screened and evaluated for his actual mental status, then we can proceed from there. No one is disputing his crime. Just his state of mental health to see why he did it. IF he is sane, and there is no result from his brain damage, then we do have a cold blooded killer, possibly a psychotic, cold, calculating and dangerous.

If he is under the loss of some control due to the damage and stress, then he needs help, and then he can face the crimes better, and deal with his guilt once he realized and can recognize how wrong it was.

In the case of the 1st, he will never be safe amongst people.

as for the second case, they may be able to salvage him.

Even if it is the second case, I can in no way see how someone who has committed an atrocity such as this can possibly be let back into society.

He shot a three-year-old girl in the head and set her body on fire. How can you possibly discuss ever letting him out of either jail or a mental insititute?

Hes not getting out. That much is clear. He is either getting:

1) Life in prison
2) Life in a mental institution (most likely tbh)
3) Execution (least likely)

Mr Hyena wrote:Hes not getting out. That much is clear. He is either getting:

1) Life in prison
2) Life in a mental institution (most likely tbh)
3) Execution (least likely)

Or a couple of years house arrest.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Calley

Mr Hyena wrote:
Nope, But I know pigs like Al Queda and the Taliban ARE murderers and its a massive leap to compare one of our soldiers to them when the evidence flies in the face of it. That much is obvious.

Or do you have proof that every Al Queda and the Taliban is in a constant state of Psychosis?

Suffering from psychosis now justifies killing?

That's a new one.

I guess you could claim the soldier in question was guilty only of manslaughter because psychosis prevented him from establishing any sort of intention, but that's a really, really difficult argument to make.

Honestly, this whole thread seems an awful lot like a thinly veiled attempt at solidifying an "us" versus "them" mentality. If you believe the soldier committed murder, then he is comparable to others who have committed murder; whose side any given murderer happens to be on is irrelevant.

The soldier should be summarily executed. Preferably by hanging in view of American soldiers and/or Afghanis. Anything short of execution will be seen as tolerance for his actions by Arab nations.

Precisely how is killing a child WORSE than killing an adult?

Surely they are equal. One life is one life?

Why is there such a distinction? Perhaps it's just me, but I cannot see where and how they are different.

I've worked with people who can deal with dead adults all day long, but dead children just feth them over. And it's NOT just those who have children. Why? I don't see a difference. Dead is dead. No matter the age.

I doubt he'll be executed, and even less that he would be handed over to the local (lack of) authority. It's yet another clusterfeth in a cluster of clusterfeths.

As for the issue of "embedded" journalists ...

I prefer them embedded into concrete and then inhumed deep down. Perhaps then, they can be proper foundations for society (no, I don't have any particular liking for the reptiles of the press) - and deep, deep down they really are nice people.

Amaya wrote:The soldier should be summarily executed. Preferably by hanging in view of American soldiers and/or Afghanis. Anything short of execution will be seen as tolerance for his actions by Arab nations.

He's an American soldier, and he should stand trial for his crimes, assuming he is deemed fit to do so. We are a nation of laws and we don't throw our citizens under the bus to appease foreign countries. We trained and sent him to that country to wage war on our behalf and it's our duty to take care of him, whether it be mentally or judicially.

Amaya wrote:The soldier should be summarily executed. Preferably by hanging in view of American soldiers and/or Afghanis. Anything short of execution will be seen as tolerance for his actions by Arab nations.

No. That may work in comic book land but not in the real world. This isn't the Romans. If it were this wouldn't be an issue in the first place, the entire country would have been razed and salted by now.

Romans...putting the 'H' in Hardcore.

chromedog wrote:Precisely how is killing a child WORSE than killing an adult?

Surely they are equal. One life is one life?

Why is there such a distinction? Perhaps it's just me, but I cannot see where and how they are different.

I've worked with people who can deal with dead adults all day long, but dead children just feth them over. And it's NOT just those who have children. Why? I don't see a difference. Dead is dead. No matter the age.

I doubt he'll be executed, and even less that he would be handed over to the local (lack of) authority. It's yet another clusterfeth in a cluster of clusterfeths.

As for the issue of "embedded" journalists ...

I prefer them embedded into concrete and then inhumed deep down. Perhaps then, they can be proper foundations for society (no, I don't have any particular liking for the reptiles of the press) - and deep, deep down they really are nice people.

You see no difference between those who can fight back and those who cant? Straining your words a bit here but by this logic theres no difference between sex with a child and sex with an adult right? They're all human. Honestly I've never met someone that can't see a distinction between killing a child and killing an adult. Just bizarre

Ouze wrote:

Amaya wrote:The soldier should be summarily executed. Preferably by hanging in view of American soldiers and/or Afghanis. Anything short of execution will be seen as tolerance for his actions by Arab nations.

He's an American soldier, and he should stand trial for his crimes, assuming he is deemed fit to do so. We are a nation of laws and we don't throw our citizens under the bus to appease foreign countries. We trained and sent him to that country to wage war on our behalf and it's our duty to take care of him, whether it be mentally or judicially.

Firing squad WOULD take care of him.

Child serial killer is sort of the tipping point for me...

Hazardous Harry wrote:

Mr Hyena wrote:Hes not getting out. That much is clear. He is either getting:

1) Life in prison
2) Life in a mental institution (most likely tbh)
3) Execution (least likely)

Or a couple of years house arrest.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Calley

Thinks were different then. Also My Lai was a different scale of atrocity in a different scale of conflict. This isn't an endorsement of the light treatment, just an understanding of it. The same sort of whitewash is impossible now. In vietnam the annihilation of a village was seen as 'everyday' and there wasnt the provision for a story to go 'viral' in quite the same way.
Also Calley led a platoon scaled atrocity, so it was the US forces who committed the act, hence the whitewash. This recent incident was clearly one soldier going postal, so the easiest way for the US to doistance itself from the massacre is not by a cover up but by disowning the actions and seeing this soldier visibly punished after an open trial.

This rouge soldier would have not only caused hurt to the victims familys, but may have just as well hurt his own family with the selfless killing. But for him to carry out such things that day he must have not been the in terms of mental state. I had been reading a similar topic on another forum site, the person who posted the topic had said that their father had been though simlar things (minus the rampageing) like mental break downs, PTSD and shell shock. that person was blameing the army for not providing help for soldiers affected by the things that they wittness. My point is that what ever happened that day he is still to be held responsible for his actions.

The similar forum topic that I had stated above was shut down yesterday for being turned into a full blown war over race and religion , I hope the topic does not follow down the same path.

Frazzled wrote:

No. That may work in comic book land but not in the real world. This isn't the Romans. If it were this wouldn't be an issue in the first place, the entire country would have been razed and salted by now.

Romans...putting the 'H' in Hardcore.

I would put it as: Romans.....getting to the crux of the matter.

After the locals see their buddies screaming themselves to death over four days while strung up, most will see the advantage behind getting in with the Pax Romana.

Orlanth wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

No. That may work in comic book land but not in the real world. This isn't the Romans. If it were this wouldn't be an issue in the first place, the entire country would have been razed and salted by now.

Romans...putting the 'H' in Hardcore.

I would put it as: Romans.....getting to the crux of the matter.

After the locals see their buddies screaming themselves to death over four days while strung up, most will see the advantage behind getting in with the Pax Romana.

I bow to your wisdom.

chromedog wrote:Precisely how is killing a child WORSE than killing an adult?

Surely they are equal. One life is one life?

Why is there such a distinction? Perhaps it's just me, but I cannot see where and how they are different.

I've worked with people who can deal with dead adults all day long, but dead children just feth them over. And it's NOT just those who have children. Why? I don't see a difference. Dead is dead. No matter the age.

.

You're right in a sense, both are equally bad in that they equate to the loss of a human life.

But, I think it is somewhat worse for children as they haven't had the opportunity to live any kind of life or had any kind of experiences that make life worth living. So, why people are generally more perturbed that a young child dies rather than an old man on his deathbed. And, of course as someone mentioned above it is the fact that they are defenceless and society should protect them. Perhaps also, it is a natural instinct, it wouldn't be a very good evolutionary method if a parent did not hold the life of its child in the highest possible regard.

Adults are supposed to protect children, not kill them.

Kilkrazy wrote:Adults are supposed to protect children, not kill them.

Or Tase them?

AustonT wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:Adults are supposed to protect children, not kill them.

Or Tase them?

Don't tase them, bro.

Orlanth wrote:

Hazardous Harry wrote:

Mr Hyena wrote:Hes not getting out. That much is clear. He is either getting:

1) Life in prison
2) Life in a mental institution (most likely tbh)
3) Execution (least likely)

Or a couple of years house arrest.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Calley

Thinks were different then. Also My Lai was a different scale of atrocity in a different scale of conflict. This isn't an endorsement of the light treatment, just an understanding of it. The same sort of whitewash is impossible now. In vietnam the annihilation of a village was seen as 'everyday' and there wasnt the provision for a story to go 'viral' in quite the same way.
Also Calley led a platoon scaled atrocity, so it was the US forces who committed the act, hence the whitewash. This recent incident was clearly one soldier going postal, so the easiest way for the US to doistance itself from the massacre is not by a cover up but by disowning the actions and seeing this soldier visibly punished after an open trial.

Good point, and I accept it. Though in this case the chance of him receiving the death penalty is slim to none.

EDIT: And given that anything short of a death sentence would be seen as lenient by the Afghani populace (and personally myself) this is still going to impact relations deeply.

Yes, either way you want to deal with it, a light sentence will not ease relations at all.

As for the poster who said this made the soldier a serial killer? Serial Killers stalk their victims, and they do their killings one at a time.

This soldier on a spree was a what is labelled a Mas Murder as he slaughtered 16 or 17 people? More akin to the nutters who went nuts at colleges or that famous McDonald's Mass killer back in the 1980's or was it the 1990's. But more along those examples.

In the end, not good or cool.

Kilkrazy wrote:Adults are supposed to protect children, not kill them.

BINGO


Automatically Appended Next Post:

AustonT wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:Adults are supposed to protect children, not kill them.

Or Tase them?

wo I draw the line at tasing. How else are you going to get the buggers to pull the coal carts?

So I'm a bad adult if I wish to see the local offspring as fertiliser?

Tasing the youth is better than killing them, admittedly - but you could at least put them DOWN the mines, instead of just pulling the carts (we're not allowed to subject animals to those gas levels anymore - so kids will have to do).

are those rogue soldiers mercs?

So I'm a bad adult if I wish to see the local offspring as fertiliser?

What age group are you talking about when you say offspring?


Some weird stuff going on at the killers base, Fort Lewis-McCord.

A Col. from there was arrested Tuesday for felony threats and harassment against his estranged wife, girlfriend, and boss.

One soldier murdered his wife and stuffed her body into a storage crate after his return from a third deployment in Iraq.

Another allegedly set his wife on fire.

Another was convicted of waterboarding his own young daughter for failing to know her ABCs. Another waterboarded his son because he wet the bed.

The Afghan kill team that perpetrated a three-month murder spree against innocent Afghan civilians came from Lewis-McChord.

The former Army private who shot and killed a National Park Service ranger at Mount Rainier National Park on New Year’s Day was from Lewis-McChord.

Suicides of soldiers from that base totaled 12 in 2011—a base record.

A recently returned British soldier is currently helping the police with their enquiries into the knife murder of his girlfriend.

We have to understand that combat operations can severly traumatize people and produce various bad reactions.

It does not mean they should be let off. It means we have to help them deal with the stress before it boils over.

AustonT wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:Adults are supposed to protect children, not kill them.

Or Tase them?

wo I draw the line at tasing. How else are you going to get the buggers to pull the coal carts?

I've heard a lot of 200+lbers younger than 10, but 5'5" to 5'8" as well? That kid is a monster for his age.



And while a public hanging is overly dramatic, this soldier should be executed. Anything less is lenient.

DutchKillsRambo wrote:
You see no difference between those who can fight back and those who cant? Straining your words a bit here but by this logic theres no difference between sex with a child and sex with an adult right? They're all human. Honestly I've never met someone that can't see a distinction between killing a child and killing an adult. Just bizarre

I don't think there is a meaningful distinction either.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Amaya wrote:I've heard a lot of 200+lbers younger than 10, but 5'5" to 5'8" as well? That kid is a monster for his age.

Yeah, that means he's only slightly shorter than me, and noticeably heavier.

Lone Cat wrote:are those rogue soldiers mercs?

It's 1 rogue soldier.
He is clearly stated as a US soldier...
It even says in the title...

Amaya wrote:I've heard a lot of 200+lbers younger than 10, but 5'5" to 5'8" as well? That kid is a monster for his age.
And while a public hanging is overly dramatic, this soldier should be executed. Anything less is lenient.

And why exactly are you just deciding he should be executed without trial or mental evaluation? As was said above, WE (as a part of this country you must also take responsibility here) WE sent him in to that country, into harms way, and into combat the likes of which you and I are not prepared for. We maintain the responsibility for the consicuences of our actions and his. If his mind has been destroyed because of our actions we are at no less fault than he for we elected the government that sent him there, we paid the taxes for his training weapons and equipment, and we told him to go into a combat situation to shoot kill and die on our behalf. We therefor have a duty to him as he had a duty to us, if by our actions he is no longer mentally functional then we have a responsibility to set things right for his sake and his family's. As an american I see no reason to value the lives of foreign nationals (and in all likely-hood hostile combatants) over the lives and lively-hoods of my countrymen.