Why shouldn't Bales be tried in Afghanistan?

[JoeB131]

Why shouldn't Bales be tried in Afghanistan?

Because he is subject to the USMJ, not your imaginary rules.

The acronym you are looking for is UCMJ (Uniform Code of MIlitary Justice) and that really wasn't the question.

If you commit a crime against a host country's citizens, in MOST cases, the host country has first crack at prosecuting you. If it's minor enough, they'll just ask that you get that fugnut the hell out of our country.

For instance, when three servicemen on Okinawa raped a teenage girl, they were handed over to the Japanese justice system and served about 8 years in a Japanese prison. Then the military got them back and gave them dishonorable discharges. (one of them came back in to the states and raped and killed an American girl, before thankfully killing himself.)

We aren't going to turn this guy over because Afghanistan doesn't have a justice system we trust to do justice. So we will prosecute him ourselves, give him the death penalty, and maybe in five years, commute that to life in prison.

 

[JoeB131]

All members of the US Armed Forces are subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. End of conversation.

Obviously, you don't know much about the UCMJ Or SOFA we have with host countries.

 

[snakedoc]

Allow me to answer the OP questions with a few questions.What type of legal system do they have in Afghanistan if in fact any? Do you honestly feel this man could get a fair trial there? If he was turned over to the Afghanistan authorities do you think he would live long enough to go to trial? The answers to these questions should answer the original question.

 

[Salt Jones]

Go be stupid somewhere else.

Is there a black Stormfront for retards like you?

Yeah, it's called the White House and the Attorney General's office.

At least you admit that Obama and Holder are racist dumbfucks too.

Yeah,. Just wait until the second term. They gonna pitch a bitch at 11:30. Oops I mean, in the second term.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Why shouldn't Bales be tried in Afghanistan?

Because he is subject to the USMJ, not your imaginary rules.

The acronym you are looking for is UCMJ (Uniform Code of MIlitary Justice) and that really wasn't the question.

If you commit a crime against a host country's citizens, in MOST cases, the host country has first crack at prosecuting you. If it's minor enough, they'll just ask that you get that fugnut the hell out of our country.

For instance, when three servicemen on Okinawa raped a teenage girl, they were handed over to the Japanese justice system and served about 8 years in a Japanese prison. Then the military got them back and gave them dishonorable discharges. (one of them came back in to the states and raped and killed an American girl, before thankfully killing himself.)

We aren't going to turn this guy over because Afghanistan doesn't have a justice system we trust to do justice. So we will prosecute him ourselves, give him the death penalty, and maybe in five years, commute that to life in prison.

You really are a know nothing, aren't you? Afghanistan is not Japan, it is a war zone. Even if it this had happened in Japan, once Bales got back to the base he would have been subject to the jurisdiction of the US, and the only way Japan would have gotten him is if they had extradited him. Host countries are granted concurrent, not primary, jurisdiction.

I suggest you do a little research before you try to sound like you know what you are talking about.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=5007581

 

[Quantum Windbag]

All members of the US Armed Forces are subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. End of conversation.

Obviously, you don't know much about the UCMJ Or SOFA we have with host countries.

He knows more than you, obviously.

 

[JoeB131]

Because he is subject to the USMJ, not your imaginary rules.

The acronym you are looking for is UCMJ (Uniform Code of MIlitary Justice) and that really wasn't the question.

If you commit a crime against a host country's citizens, in MOST cases, the host country has first crack at prosecuting you. If it's minor enough, they'll just ask that you get that fugnut the hell out of our country.

For instance, when three servicemen on Okinawa raped a teenage girl, they were handed over to the Japanese justice system and served about 8 years in a Japanese prison. Then the military got them back and gave them dishonorable discharges. (one of them came back in to the states and raped and killed an American girl, before thankfully killing himself.)

We aren't going to turn this guy over because Afghanistan doesn't have a justice system we trust to do justice. So we will prosecute him ourselves, give him the death penalty, and maybe in five years, commute that to life in prison.

You really are a know nothing, aren't you? Afghanistan is not Japan, it is a war zone. Even if it this had happened in Japan, once Bales got back to the base he would have been subject to the jurisdiction of the US, and the only way Japan would have gotten him is if they had extradited him. Host countries are granted concurrent, not primary, jurisdiction.

I suggest you do a little research before you try to sound like you know what you are talking about.

[rl]

Uh, Guy. Japan is a sovereign country. Afghanistan is a soveriegn country. Your argument doesn't fly. They had elections, they put a government into place. We are perfectly willing to let them prosecute their own people. We just don't want to let them prosecute one of ours.

Which is fine. But admit it what it is. Karzai is a puppet, and has no real authority.

This is the trap we are kind of falling into. If we don't let the Afghans prosecute Bales, we are admitting they are our puppets, which halfway makes the Taliban's case for it.

Me, personally, I'm for pulling out. Tomorrow. This thing stopped having a point years ago.

 

[JoeB131]

All members of the US Armed Forces are subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. End of conversation.

Obviously, you don't know much about the UCMJ Or SOFA we have with host countries.

He knows more than you, obviously.

No, he doesn't.

This is just a stinging reminder that even we don't take Karzai seriously. And if we don't, why should the Afghans?

 

[Two Thumbs]

He should be found sane or insane by the military.

If insane, he's warded within the US, since I don't think muslims care about that.

If sane, he faces Afghanistan justice.

Unless there is some treaty or deal in place to prevent this, is standard for military vets to face civilian justice in host countries.

 

[Warrior102]

He should receive a fair trial in the U.S., as he's a U.S. Soldier.
Following the fair trial, he should then be executed by a USA firing squad.

 

[JoeB131]

He should receive a fair trial in the U.S., as he's a U.S. Soldier.
Following the fair trial, he should then be executed by a USA firing squad.

If he's going to be executed anyway, why not turn him over to the Afghans?

Seems to me we are in a trick bag here. Insisting that we try him for a crime against their citizens is pretty much underscoring their second class status.

If an Afghan diplomat or soldier here for training flipped out and killed 17 Americans, do you really think we'd respect their request to try him there?

 

[editec]

Because OCCUPIED NATIONS don't get to judge the crimes of their occuperiers.

The rightness or wrongness of that is debatable, but that is the way it is.

 

[bripat9643]

Because OCCUPIED NATIONS don't get to judge the crimes of their occuperiers.

The rightness or wrongness of that is debatable, but that is the way it is.

The reason they were occupied in the first place is the fact that they are a pack of bloodthirsty savages who harbored an infestation of terrorists. They haven't earned the right to try any American.

 

[bripat9643]

He should receive a fair trial in the U.S., as he's a U.S. Soldier.
Following the fair trial, he should then be executed by a USA firing squad.

If he's going to be executed anyway, why not turn him over to the Afghans? ?

Simple, dufus: In this country we give people a fair trial.

turning him over to the Afghans would be the equivalent of an execution without a trial. You can't recieve a fair trial from a pack of bloodthirsty savages.

 

[Old Rocks]

Yup, so let's give him a fair trial, then hang him. Justice done.

Of course, what of the justice that sent a man that had symptoms of brain trauma back into this hell? What of the people that made that decision?

 

[Si modo]

Why shouldn't Bales be tried in Afghanistan?

Because we are a country of laws and the law says that he is tried in the jurisdiction that applies to him - that is the UCMJ.

Anything else?

 

[saveliberty]

When this first happened, the military suggested the trial would be in Afghanistan. Something about logistics with witnesses. Wonder how willing witnesses will be coming to a military base in the US to testify against a soldier? That seems wrong to me.

 

[JoeB131]

He should receive a fair trial in the U.S., as he's a U.S. Soldier.
Following the fair trial, he should then be executed by a USA firing squad.

If he's going to be executed anyway, why not turn him over to the Afghans? ?

Simple, dufus: In this country we give people a fair trial.

turning him over to the Afghans would be the equivalent of an execution without a trial. You can't recieve a fair trial from a pack of bloodthirsty savages.

Um, we are talking about a guy who walked out in the middle of the night and killed 17 people in their sleep, right. I think we have a hard time throwing the "Savage" label around. Glass houses and all that, old chap...

The fact is, we are perfectly content to let them judge and convict and punish their own people. We are not letting Americans judge Afghans, we are letting them judge themselves.

This guy committed a crime in their country against their citizens. I'm not seeing a big problem with turning him over to them.

 

[JoeB131]

Why shouldn't Bales be tried in Afghanistan?

Because we are a country of laws and the law says that he is tried in the jurisdiction that applies to him - that is the UCMJ.

Anything else?

Um, not really.

Service members are tried by host countries all the time...

 

[Warrior102]

Why shouldn't Bales be tried in Afghanistan?

Because we are a country of laws and the law says that he is tried in the jurisdiction that applies to him - that is the UCMJ.

Anything else?

Um, not really.

Service members are tried by host countries all the time...

A-Stan's not a "host" country.