DogOnPorch Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 (edited) Sending in a commando squad for peacekeeping duties was not a smart move on Ottawa's part!these troops were training to go in quick kill the enemy and get out...disbanding them is just another dark blotch on Canada's history! They sent the wrong troops for that type of mission! Agreed. Not to mention you gotta love the way this always gets turned into one of those 'do you still beat your wife?' hostile witness deals with the holier-than-thou crowd. Like it was you and I that sent the CAR to Somalia then ordered them to shoot 'hungry children'. When I see waldo and wyly strapping on the ol' rucksack and heading off to feed the starving in Africa...I might actually care what they actually think. Edited September 24, 2009 by DogOnPorch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 well - good on ya! But acknowledging criminal behaviour is only a baby step... it doesn't answer the original question posed as to whether or not, given your previous statements, you actually endorse that "shooting in the back and execution style killing", criminal behaviour. Question posed - question still unanswered.And I said it would be super if instead of armed paratroopers they had sent wyle and yourself and brave folks like you who are willing to go into an armed conflict w/o being armed to perform the peacekeeping duties that we as a country are so keen on. Good on ya...as you'd say. question posed... question (still) unanswered! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 Wring your hands and carry-on...when's the airplane leaving for Africa? All packed? Got your shots? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 And I said it would be super if instead of armed paratroopers they had sent wyle and yourself and brave folks like you who are willing to go into an armed conflict w/o being armed to perform the peacekeeping duties that we as a country are so keen on. Good on ya...as you'd say. ah, yes... yours is a tried and true tactic followed by hawkish proponents when anyone dares to call them on the language of their lack of convictions... if you're going to go "all hawkish" touting the validity of CAR "food bait" tactics, you should be more than willing to come straight out and admit, without reservation, that you support "shooting in the back and execution style killings". Stand up for the language of your convictions - or not... but stand up, either way. Why avoid the question posed to you? It's a simple question? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 ah, yes... yours is a tried and true tactic followed by hawkish proponents when anyone dares to call them on the language of their lack of convictions... if you're going to go "all hawkish" touting the validity of CAR "food bait" tactics, you should be more than willing to come straight out and admit, without reservation, that you support "shooting in the back and execution style killings". Stand up for the language of your convictions - or not... but stand up, either way. Why avoid the question posed to you? It's a simple question? So...do you still beat your wife? Try as you might Ben Stone... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 collective punishment suits collective behaviour...and where in any rule of any law does it say Para regiments cannot be disbanded, this is a job when the boss re-assigns you, you do as your told or quit...the forces are not a private club for psychotic rambo's...want to play rambo go join the french legionaires... What are you saying, did we punish all Germans for war crimes commited by german forces, did we punish all the Japanese people for thier crimes commited during the war....NO we did not WHY, because it is again'st our laws to collective punish any race, group, or organization....and while those that commited a crime, or looked the other way were punished and face our courts...investagations where completed not only by a military investagation team, but serveral civilian ones as well....and as our laws state one is inocent until proven guilty....those that charges could be liaded where liaded, those that stood around and done nothing the military took matters into thier own hands and asked for dozens of early retirements....those that refused well lets just say thier carears stoped, and where taken out of command roles and rode a desk...until they released.... But your right there is no law stating that our government can not creat or disband any military unit it chooses....that being said is disbanding a unit with disgrace is a huge , huge dishonor, one to it's members , the military, and Canadians ....one that will be worn by it's members thruogh out history....Most soldiers in the Regt where outstanding soldiers and did not deserve this... I've told you before it's not a job but a way of life....and within the Army the CAR was what every soldier wanted to be part of the best the nation had to offer...The somolia affair happend in 92, after it's return the army went to great length to clean up the regt, so in 1995 there was not one shit disturber left from the somolia times....all that was left was troops that just wanted to be apart of Canada's elite unit...Canada's CAR.... " The sorry sequence of events in Somalia was not the work of a few bad apples," concluded chairman Gilles Létourneau, a Federal Court of Canada judge, "but the inevitable result of systematic organization and leadership failures, many occurring over long periods of time and ignored by our military leaders for just as long." Once again they condemn the entire Regt, but can not find any evidence to charge anyone else with any crimes, but i guess they are not responsable by law for what they print on some report, and in this case it's all one mans opinion.... And there are other reports that give kudo's to the CAR for the job they did in Somolia, reports from US spec ops units , reports from NGO organizations reports from other nations....all giving thanks for the regt service in guess where Somolia...i guess though not many have read those, including the judge that made this report.... As the inquiry's report makes clear, the frame of mind among certain Airborne members was well-known to military leaders - and worrisome. One group, calling themselves the "Rebels," acted as though they were a law unto themselves. Against orders, they repeatedly raised the American Confederate flag in their barracks at Camp Petawawa, 130 km northwest of Ottawa. They torched the car of a sergeant who raised their ire. And even by combat unit standards, some Airborne troopers showed excessive aggressiveness in the view of senior officers. Are you kidding me Rebels....shit how many orgs in the states fly the rebel flag...many still honour the sothern army and it's values....raising the American rebel flag thats got to be really bad....and it was not some troopers that where aggresive it was all of them....thats what happens when you recieve elite training from around the globe, US ranger tabs where very common, as was recieving training from US green berets, US Naval seals, British SAS,in fact it was not uncommon for most Airbourne soldiers to have wings from 3 or more countries....i mean lets not forget they where Canada's shock troops....not boy scouts or RCMP officers....and where constantly trained to a razors edge....Aggressiveness was thier job.... It was all very calculated. Using food and water as bait, a team of Canadian soldiers, including a sniper, lay waiting in the dark. Two Somalis crawled through a fence and grabbed the food. The soldiers ordered them to halt. When the Somalis turned and ran, the Canadians, equipped with night vision goggles, shot both of them in the back, killing one. Afterward, as the report notes, Canadian officers concluded that the troops were simply doing their job. But the commissioners disagree, writing that the deliberate trap was "a dubious interpretation of the rules of engagement." This was a Leg rumour that flew around camp....nothing was proven and it is here say....and like our justice system says your inocent until PROVEN guilty...as i believe you've quoted before....every night we were faced with some intrusion into the camp, some where looters and some were somolia militia trying to give back some pay back....for us not letting them Hyjack a food convoy....check the ROE's and tell me at night with 1 st gen night vision gear you can tell the difference between some stealing something or trying to blow something up.... Yes intruders were shot, keeping in mind our entire compound was surrounded in razor wire stacked 3 wide and 3 high one did not have to be a rocket scienctist to figure out we did not want anyone to enter....huge signs where posted on the wire intruders will be shot....I also agree that if one was hungry enough one would try anything to get something to eat....but one would be sucidal if one tried it at the Airbourne camp.... Seldom has a federal public inquiry been so blunt and unequivocal. The three commissioners called for a full-scale criminal investigation into the March 4, 1993, shooting by Canadian soldiers of two Somalis, one of whom died. They urged the government to look into possible perjury charges against senior military officials who, the commissioners said, lied on the witness stand And what ever happen to that inquiry was there any charges laided....NO....but thats not what is inplied here is it....no here you've impied guilt....thats some justice system you got or practice.... Then, in the spring of 1995, Maj. Barry Armstrong, a doctor who served in Belet Huen, went public with allegations that the Somali killed on March 4 had been shot in the back of the head at point-blank range. read the ROE's and show me were once all conditions have been meet you can't use deadly force at piont blank range....and did anything come of that inquiry....was someone charged NO....once more your assuming things are bad....So either your justice system is broken or the same justice system you've been flaunting is alive and well.... Below is a web site that has been out for years, it's a diary by a 3 commando soldier of his tour in somolia read it and tell me you still think the entire Regt's to blame for those few Bad apples.... I also want to repeat this... our current JTF2 was created around alot of those CAR soldiers, some still serving but a good potion did do just that and quit, if they could not be part of the best they wanted nothing to do with our military or government at the time which had little or no idea what they had done for this nation and Canadians. that army guy makes it murder, and it was covered up...the Para regiment was sick and out of control... now your talking out of your ass.... CAR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 ah, yes... yours is a tried and true tactic followed by hawkish proponents when anyone dares to call them on the language of their lack of convictions... if you're going to go "all hawkish" touting the validity of CAR "food bait" tactics, you should be more than willing to come straight out and admit, without reservation, that you support "shooting in the back and execution style killings". Stand up for the language of your convictions - or not... but stand up, either way. Why avoid the question posed to you? It's a simple question?So...do you still beat your wife? Try as you might Ben Stone... did you fall off your porch? I have no idea who Ben Stone is or what your deflection to wife-beating has to do with your unwillingness to acknowledge, or not, your support for shootings in the back and execution style killing... vis-a-vis, the specifics of the Somalia affair - or, in general, for that matter? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 did you fall off your porch? I have no idea who Ben Stone is or what your deflection to wife-beating has to do with your unwillingness to acknowledge, or not, your support for shootings in the back and execution style killing... vis-a-vis, the specifics of the Somalia affair - or, in general, for that matter? It's called 'treating the witness as hostile' and I don't play that game...especially with a boor such as yourself...Ben Stone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wulf42 Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 Agreed. Not to mention you gotta love the way this always gets turned into one of those 'do you still beat your wife?' hostile witness deals with the holier-than-thou crowd. Like it was you and I that sent the CAR to Somalia then ordered them to shoot 'hungry children'. When I see waldo and wyly strapping on the ol' rucksack and heading off to feed the starving in Africa...I might actually care what they actually think. lol...........i find this a lot on here, if they disagree with their ideal's or you if want to see murderous terrorist's thugs disposed of then they act as if you eat Babies and hurl the insults...and deflect the issue into something bigger than Omar........my opinion is Omar should have been drilled when found but since we are past that.......give him a military trial if found guilty? then it's "Last cigarette?? Blindfold??? any last words??" and then we deport his family back to the middle east! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted September 25, 2009 Report Share Posted September 25, 2009 ah, yes... yours is a tried and true tactic followed by hawkish proponents when anyone dares to call them on the language of their lack of convictions... if you're going to go "all hawkish" touting the validity of CAR "food bait" tactics, you should be more than willing to come straight out and admit, without reservation, that you support "shooting in the back and execution style killings". Stand up for the language of your convictions - or not... but stand up, either way. Why avoid the question posed to you? It's a simple question?So...do you still beat your wife? Try as you might Ben Stone... did you fall off your porch? I have no idea who Ben Stone is or what your deflection to wife-beating has to do with your unwillingness to acknowledge, or not, your support for shootings in the back and execution style killing... vis-a-vis, the specifics of the Somalia affair - or, in general, for that matter?It's called 'treating the witness as hostile' and I don't play that game...especially with a boor such as yourself...Ben Stone. Well colour me gobsmacked! Clearly I did not recognize your extreme sensitivities to actually being called to account for your statements/position on the Somali affair and actions taken by CAR personnel. Obviously, if you issued a firm renunciation of "shootings in the back and execution style killing", we could easily dispense with your interpreted courtroom theatrics! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted September 25, 2009 Report Share Posted September 25, 2009 Well colour me gobsmacked! Clearly I did not recognize your extreme sensitivities to actually being called to account for your statements/position on the Somali affair and actions taken by CAR personnel. Obviously, if you issued a firm renunciation of "shootings in the back and execution style killing", we could easily dispense with your interpreted courtroom theatrics! You're texting from the plane to Somalia? I'm impressed at the marvels of today's technology. What an age we live in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ace Posted October 29, 2009 Report Share Posted October 29, 2009 Some new information on this case ... Omar Khadr 'innocent' in death of U.S. soldier October 29, 2009 Torstar News Service http://www.thespec.com/News/BreakingNews/article/662769 Guantanamo detainee Omar Khadr was buried face down under rubble, blinded by shrapnel and crippled, at the time the Pentagon alleges he threw a grenade that fatally wounded a U.S. soldier, according to classified photographs and defence documents obtained by the Star. The pictures, which were taken following a 2002 firefight in Afghanistan and have never been made public, show the then 15-year-old Canadian covered in bricks and mud from the roof of a bombed compound. The body of an adult fighter – the unnamed man Khadr's lawyers contend could have thrown the grenade that killed U.S. Sgt. Christopher Speer – lies beside him. The photographs were part of an 18-page submission presented earlier this year by Khadr's former military defence team to an Obama administration task force investigating Guantanamo. While the defence's argument that it was physically impossible for Khadr to have thrown the grenade first surfaced at a Guantanamo hearing last year, the military judge would not release the photos or declassify the written submissions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted October 29, 2009 Report Share Posted October 29, 2009 Some new information on this case ... It's unlikely this will do anything to make people who who hate Khadr change their minds about anything. Layne Morris, one of the soldiers injured in the 2002 firefight, is frustrated at the time it has taken to decide Khadr's fate. In a telephone interview from Utah on Wednesday, he said he doesn't personally need a trial – "I've had closure, if that's what you can call it." But he added he would be disappointed if Khadr isn't held accountable for Speer's death."Whether he pulled the trigger or threw the grenade or not, I think he was part of it. "I think there needs to be a trial so people can say, `Here's what happened and here's how it turned out,' instead of just going on in limbo forever, which it seems to be doing now." I wonder if there will ever be a time when old soldiers from this war will ever find it in themselves to gather like the old veterans from Germany and Canada do or did from time to time? I don't see see why not myself. "He's a very decent young man, very, very decent," Xenakis told the Star. "Kind-hearted, thoughtful, sensitive, and you look at him and you see this kid has had a tragic experience. "Right now we don't talk about politics or ideological stuff. My sense is that he disavows all of that."Those are early childhood experiences, (and) they've been edited in his head so many different ways." Layne Morris sounds like a decent sort of fellow too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Bandelot Posted October 29, 2009 Report Share Posted October 29, 2009 (edited) Now we know why Mr. Harper does not want him sent back to Canada. After all the lies and spin we've heard, h$e would be a free man. And the lawsuit would be hefty hefty Edited October 29, 2009 by Sir Bandelot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted October 29, 2009 Report Share Posted October 29, 2009 I wonder if there will ever be a time when old soldiers from this war will ever find it in themselves to gather like the old veterans from Germany and Canada do or did from time to time? I don't see see why not myself. NO....Guys like Khadr are terrorists not soldiers...big difference... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted October 29, 2009 Report Share Posted October 29, 2009 Even if the turd is found to be not guilty of murder, they have the little f**ker for making road-side bombs. He's a traitor and a terrorist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted October 29, 2009 Report Share Posted October 29, 2009 Now we know why Mr. Harper does not want him sent back to Canada. After all the lies and spin we've heard, h$e would be a free man. And the lawsuit would be hefty hefty Guantanamo's chief prosecutor, U.S. Navy Capt. John Murphy, said in an interview with the Star on Wednesday that Obama's task force is privy to all the classified evidence and interrogators' notes and he remains confident Khadr will be charged with murder Some how i don't think he's coming back, the above quote is one, second we as a nation don't have what it takes to charge him with any of a number of other charges.....and we don't want the world finding out that little secret... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Bandelot Posted October 29, 2009 Report Share Posted October 29, 2009 Actual trial? I'm all for it. I mean, a real one. Please execute justice. NOT, leaving prisoners in detention for years without due process. Thats the travesty here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted October 29, 2009 Report Share Posted October 29, 2009 NOT, leaving prisoners in detention for years without due process. Thats the travesty here. You mean like we did to the Japanense people during WWII, what they get again, oh ya a "SORRY"..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted October 29, 2009 Report Share Posted October 29, 2009 (edited) NO....Guys like Khadr are terrorists not soldiers...big difference... That's the real rub here isn't it, people are still trying to pretend this isn't a real war (even though its called one), because if we don't maintain this fiction it disallows all this murky quasi-legal mumbo jumbo that justifies suspending habeus corpus and holding human beings indefinitely and torturing them etc etc. This action that Khadr was caught up in sure looks like a classic sort of combat situation in a war, guns, bullets, hand grenades etc. If Khadr is a terrorist then so is the west for having terrorized millions of people via the various dictators it has supported in the region, a true network of global terror if there ever was one. Terrorism is just another form of warfare in a conflict without rules or borders that the west has been prosecuting in the region around Afghanistan for decades. Edited October 29, 2009 by eyeball Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted October 29, 2009 Report Share Posted October 29, 2009 This action that Khadr was caught up in sure looks like a classic sort of combat situation in a war, guns, bullets, hand grenades etc. During the war in Russia, partisans, if caught, were subjected to some of the worst forms of torture imaginable. One account I recall involved the leader of one band having his eye-lids cut off so he couldn't close his eyes as the SS slowly tortured his fellow partisans in front of him. None survived the event. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Bandelot Posted October 29, 2009 Report Share Posted October 29, 2009 You mean like we did to the Japanense people during WWII, what they get again, oh ya a "SORRY"..... I recall they got money as well, years later. If they had already died, their next of kin got the money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepitsimple Posted October 29, 2009 Report Share Posted October 29, 2009 (edited) Some new information on this case ...Omar Khadr 'innocent' in death of U.S. soldier October 29, 2009 Torstar News Service http://www.thespec.com/News/BreakingNews/article/662769 Guantanamo detainee Omar Khadr was buried face down under rubble, blinded by shrapnel and crippled, at the time the Pentagon alleges he threw a grenade that fatally wounded a U.S. soldier, according to classified photographs and defence documents obtained by the Star. The pictures, which were taken following a 2002 firefight in Afghanistan and have never been made public, show the then 15-year-old Canadian covered in bricks and mud from the roof of a bombed compound. The body of an adult fighter – the unnamed man Khadr's lawyers contend could have thrown the grenade that killed U.S. Sgt. Christopher Speer – lies beside him. The photographs were part of an 18-page submission presented earlier this year by Khadr's former military defence team to an Obama administration task force investigating Guantanamo. While the defence's argument that it was physically impossible for Khadr to have thrown the grenade first surfaced at a Guantanamo hearing last year, the military judge would not release the photos or declassify the written submissions. No new news here. For heaven's sake - this is Khadr's lawyer speaking - of course he's going to say these things......and of course The Star is going to trumpet it. Now let's wait for the prosecution to state it's case. Somebody threw the grenade and Khadr was the only one left alive. Edited October 29, 2009 by Keepitsimple Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted October 29, 2009 Report Share Posted October 29, 2009 No new news here. For heaven's sake - this is Khadr's lawyer speaking - of course he's going to say these things......and of course The Star is going to trumpet it. Now let's wait for the prosecution to state it's case. Somebody threw the grenade and Khadr was the only one left alive. actually... it's a part of a submission from Khadr's earlier legal team that included U.S. military lawyers... lawyers who are no longer associated with Khadr's defense - yet still maintain Khadr's innocence given the evidence (within said submission). oh, of course, connect the dogs from the online Hamilton Spectator all the way back to Torstar... here - try this actual Star link with a more detailed/complete story. Perhaps you could point out real bias/agenda within the article - thanks in advance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted October 29, 2009 Report Share Posted October 29, 2009 actually... it's a part of a submission from Khadr's earlier legal team that included U.S. military lawyers... lawyers who are no longer associated with Khadr's defense - yet still maintain Khadr's innocence given the evidence (within said submission). oh, of course, connect the dogs from the online Hamilton Spectator all the way back to Torstar... here - try this actual Star link with a more detailed/complete story. Perhaps you could point out real bias/agenda within the article - thanks in advance. well the witness reports shooting the last remaining person an adult who could have thrown the grenade in the head...Kadr was certianly no shape to throw anything, medical reports also say his heart was visible and add to that the incredible feat of hiding himself under all that debris while face down...this kid was superman!... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.