SAS soldier quits in disgust of US army tactics

[Garbarsardar]

You probably know SAS, they're not exactly liberal bleeding hearts muslim-lover pussys...

And the Telegraph is definitely not a leftie paper...quite the opposite I would think...

so here's the story:
An SAS soldier has refused to fight in Iraq and has left the Army over the "illegal" tactics of United States troops and the policies of coalition forces.
After three months in Baghdad, Ben Griffin told his commander that he was no longer prepared to fight alongside American forces.
He said he had witnessed "dozens of illegal acts" by US troops, claiming they viewed all Iraqis as "untermenschen" - the Nazi term for races regarded as sub-human.
The decision marks the first time an SAS soldier has refused to go into combat and quit the Army on moral grounds.
It immediately brought to an end Mr Griffin's exemplary, eight-year career in which he also served with the Parachute Regiment, taking part in operations in Northern Ireland, Macedonia and Afghanistan.

So what happened next?

"I did not join the British Army to conduct American foreign policy," he said. He expected to be labelled a coward and to face a court martial and imprisonment after making what "the most difficult decision of my life" last March.
Instead, he was discharged with a testimonial describing him as a "balanced, honest, loyal and determined individual who possesses the strength of character to have the courage of his convictions".
Last night Patrick Mercer, the shadow minister for homeland security, said: "Trooper Griffin is a highly experienced soldier. This makes his decision particularly disturbing and his views and opinions must be listened to by the Government."

The MoD declined to comment.

Mr Griffin's allegations came as the Foreign Office minister Kim Howells, visiting Basra a week ago, admitted that Iraq was now "a mess".

source:http://portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/m...12/ixhome.html

[mischief]

what should be pointed out immediately is that in the british system, to claim the status of conscientious objector the standards are rather different to that of the American system. details of the british burden of proofs can be found here... http://www.wri-irg.org/news/2003/ukforces1.htm

Also, as an SAS trooper, he is in a small and elite unit trained to be independent minded and encouraging inititative. as such he would be very likely to have a personal relationship with his commanding officers, so this makes the outcome in this case all the more likely.

[Bwaho]

Interesting... I've heard similar stories where British troops have complained about the American soldiers behaviour. From what I read the American soldiers fired mortar shells right into masses of civilians in markets and other populated places.

[IamthePope]

From what I read the American soldiers fired mortar shells right into masses of civilians in markets and other populated places.

While I cant prove that false, I highly doubt it. Why would US soliders do such a thing. It doesnt make sense.

[Garbarsardar]

While I cant prove that false, I highly doubt it. Why would US soliders do such a thing. It doesnt make sense.

Not making sense is exactly what happens in Iraq. Take the Haditha incident where Marines killed 15 civilians most of them in their nightclothes. First they tried to cover up saying that it was an insurgent's bomb. Only when confronted with overwhelming eveidence the military decided to launch an investigation.

There are also questions about why the military took so long to investigate the details of the Haditha incident. Soon after the killings, the mayor of Haditha, Emad Jawad Hamza, led an angry delegation of elders up to the Marine camp beside a dam on the Euphrates River. Hamza says, "The captain admitted that his men had made a mistake. He said that his men thought there were terrorists near the houses, and he didn't give any other reason."

But the military stood by its initial contention —that the Iraqis had been killed by an insurgent bomb— until January when TIME gave a copy of the video and witnesses' testimony to Colonel Barry Johnson, a U.S. military spokesman in Baghdad. After reviewing the evidence, Johnson passed it on to the military command, suggesting that the events of Haditha be given "a full and formal investigation." In February an infantry colonel went to Haditha for a weeklong probe in which he interviewed Marines, survivors and doctors at the morgue, according to military officials close to the investigation. The probe concluded that the civilians were in fact killed by Marines and not by an insurgent's bomb and that no insurgents appeared to be in the first two houses raided by the Marines. The probe found, however, that the deaths were the result of "collateral damage" rather than malicious intent by the Marines, investigators say.


source:http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...4682-4,00.html

[Carach]

Interesting... I've heard similar stories where British troops have complained about the American soldiers behaviour. From what I read the American soldiers fired mortar shells right into masses of civilians in markets and other populated places.

thats because the british soldiers are more mature and older than the majority of american teenage idiots that are drafted in ..

[danzig]

thats because the british soldiers are more mature and older than the majority of american teenage idiots that are drafted in ..

Psst they are volunteers not drafted and if you compare SAS to US army then yes its probably true most SAS will be older more mature then a typical grunt since SAS are 'elite'...its a poor comparison. Compare regular British soldiers to American would be more accurate.

Its not as simple as you try to make out, hicks.

Speculating is all your doing.

Yes its only 'simple' when its US troops involved eh?

[bigfootedfred]

Psst they are volunteers not drafted and if you compare SAS to US army then yes its probably true most SAS will be older more mature then a typical grunt since SAS are 'elite'...its a poor comparison. Compare regular British soldiers to American would be more accurate.

A Fair point...
Only the best soilders get into the SAS. most of them come from the Paras...
and the requirements and training to get in the Para's are very high to begin with anyway.

The comment at this soilder not being allowed to say what he said becuase he served in northern ireland....huh?

The british, especialy the SAS, are guilty of wartime atrocities in northern Ireland

Complete and utter rubbish.

White Phosphorous is used for illumination and concealment, perfectly legally. Using it to flush out enemy forces from dug-in positions is good use of initiative. There are plenty of iffy things that the American army gets up to, but the use of WP is not one of them.

Well actaully....

The Pentagon's admission - despite earlier denials - that US troops used white phosphorus as a weapon in Falluja last year is more than a public relations issue - it has opened up a debate about the use of this weapon in modern warfare.
The admission contradicted a statement this week from the new and clearly under-briefed US ambassador in London Robert Holmes Tuttle that US forces "do not use napalm or white phosphorus as weapons".
The official line to that point had been that WP, or Willie Pete to use its old name from Vietnam, was used only to illuminate the battlefield and to provide smoke for camouflage.

'Shake 'n Bake'
This line however crumbled when bloggers (whose influence must not be under-estimated these days) ferreted out an article published by the US Army's Field Artillery Magazine in its issue of March/April this year.
The article, written by a captain, a first lieutenant and a sergeant, was a review of the attack on Falluja in November 2004 and in particular of the use of indirect fire, mainly mortars.
It makes quite clear that WP was used as a weapon not just as illumination or camouflage.

source

[Sétanta]

thats because the british soldiers are more mature and older than the majority of american teenage idiots that are drafted in ..

Oh really. Brits are more mature than Americans how? There soldiers are undoubtably far more educated, you know they all go to Oxford and all. We all know American Soldiers are idiots who eat babies and all.

And there isn't a draft.

[MasterAdnin]

Oh really. Brits are more mature than Americans how? There soldiers are undoubtably far more educated, you know they all go to Oxford and all. We all know American Soldiers are idiots who eat babies and all.

No, no, you got it all wrong Mudd. We Americans are southern hicks who drive our pick ups our on the farm all day long.

Seriously, How are Brits more mature then Americans? There is not level of maturity on either side and is determined by individuals.

Adnan

[Sétanta]

No, no, you got it all wrong Mudd. We Americans are southern hicks who drive our pick ups our on the farm all day long.

Seriously, How are Brits more mature then Americans? There is not level of maturity on either side and is determined by individuals.

Oh yeah. That too.

I suppose it is because the British have an inferiority complex about losing their superpower status in under 50 years to a rebellious province of theirs

[Carach]

Oh really. Brits are more mature than Americans how? There soldiers are undoubtably far more educated, you know they all go to Oxford and all. We all know American Soldiers are idiots who eat babies and all.

And there isn't a draft.

draft thing - again another guy that doesnt read.. jeez, wont bother repeating myself for a third (or fourth time i think ?)

And for some reason the damn forum wont let me copy multiple quotes, so i will just have to answer without quoting all the posts you made around the same time as the above one.

British soldiers have a better idea of PEACE KEEPING than american 18 year old GIs - fact, sorry mate, its fact, dont even try to argue this, we are known for peacekeeping abilities dude, hence why we are there, hence why the american military leadership admit we are there, hence why we are replacing american soldiers in afghanistan (in a dangerous area of it..) to make it more PEACEFUL. so on so forth into the night..

To be able to peace keep you must be mature..pretty much explains it all.

I never said all american soldiers are idiotic children, i said a lot are (if there werent many of them you wouldnt be getting reports all the time on the news about what they done yesterday, last week, the other year..so on so forth..)

Compare all the incidents that occured in iraq caused by american soldiers, and all those caused by british ones.

Can you see now? the weights are quite a bit one sided on the scale

[Carach]

LOL good joke. Teenage idiots that are drafted....Wrong wrong wrong, so thats three strikes bud. Go join the army, marines, navy , or air force douche, and you'll find out that they're the best of us.

three strikes? what are you talking about?

[crazyj]

three strikes? what are you talking about?

They're not all teenagers, they're not idiots, they're not drafted.

[Carach]

They're not all teenagers, they're not idiots, they're not drafted.

You obviously didnt read the many posts i made after that..

D/W dude, your not the first and probably not the last to completely ignore everything else i posted in the thread.

[MaximiIian]

From what I read the American soldiers fired mortar shells right into masses of civilians in markets and other populated places.

As the saying goes, "all's fair in love and war".

[imb39]

As the saying goes, "all's fair in love and war".

I didn't realise that the American soldiers regarded those civilians as being part of the war. Thank you for clearing it up.

[Garbarsardar]

As the saying goes, "all's fair in love and war".

Well, the people who did the Nuremberg trials were not of the same opinion. That's why in most languages the term war crimes exist, and why incidents as the Nanking massacre are refered to as...massacre and not as "The Battle of Nanking".

[MaximiIian]

Well, the people who did the Nuremberg trials were not of the same opinion.

Nuremberg trials were different. The holocaust was not a war crime, it was a crime against humanity. The 12 million killed in holocaust were murdered in a genocide. That's completely different from civilians in Iraq that happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

[imb39]

Nuremberg trials were different. The holocaust was not a war crime, it was a crime against humanity. The 12 million killed in holocaust were murdered in a genocide. That's completely different from civilians in Iraq that happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

does not equate with

As the saying goes, "all's fair in love and war".

Comments like that do nothing to promote this farce, nothing at all.