17 US Soldiers Will NOT Be Prosecuted

[Annie]

Good.

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/9C8ABBED-CCB4-43AB-8A95-9D84A51F40CE.htm

US Army won't prosecute 17 soldiers

Saturday 26 March 2005, 22:21 Makka Time, 19:21 GMT

Seventeen soldiers were investigated in prisoner deaths

US Army officials have decided not to prosecute 17 soldiers involved in the deaths of prisoners in Iraq and Afghanistan, a military report says.

Military investigators recommended courts-martial for the soldiers in the cases of three prisoner deaths for charges ranging from making false statements to murder.

Officers rejected those recommendations, ruling that the soldiers lawfully used force or didn't understand the rules for using force, or that there was not enough evidence to prosecute...

 

[NATO AIR]

Its bad...

Sometimes, "examples" have to be made. They're made all the time over here in Japan with sailors, marines, soldiers and airmen who screw up, in a variety of ways. The costs of their misbehavior, of their screw ups, is always high for the US government and its interests. Same with these "detainee deaths" and other abuses.

The 17 soldiers here should have been severely disciplined and prosecuted, as per the recomendation of the military investigators. The last thing the Army or any other branch of the military needs at this time is a "siege and us vs. them" mentality that prevents justice and the truth from coming out and from the military taking the steps it must take to ensure this happens much less in the future.

 

[Annie]

Its bad...

Sometimes, "examples" have to be made. They're made all the time over here in Japan with sailors, marines, soldiers and airmen who screw up, in a variety of ways. The costs of their misbehavior, of their screw ups, is always high for the US government and its interests. Same with these "detainee deaths" and other abuses.

The 17 soldiers here should have been severely disciplined and prosecuted, as per the recomendation of the military investigators. The last thing the Army or any other branch of the military needs at this time is a "siege and us vs. them" mentality that prevents justice and the truth from coming out and from the military taking the steps it must take to ensure this happens much less in the future.

I'd agree if there didn't seem to be an over responsibility going on here. This is not 'police work' and the standards are not the same. I'm still waiting to hear if they are going to prosecute Pantano, which would seem a travesty from what I've read about the incident.

 

[NATO AIR]

Maybe I've been over here too long... they court-martial people here for the slightest of offenses, let alone something this serious.

I should probably study these cases as best I can before I make any more pronouncements, but to me, if the military investigators were reccomending serious punishment, then they should get it, not a slap on the wrist.

 

[Annie]

Maybe I've been over here too long... they court-martial people here for the slightest of offenses, let alone something this serious.

I should probably study these cases as best I can before I make any more pronouncements, but to me, if the military investigators were reccomending serious punishment, then they should get it, not a slap on the wrist.

When a service person harms someone 'under their protection' I agree. When it's in the course of conflict, well they aren't 'cops' and 'civilians.'