I don't get it. I know there are "rules" in war and don't doubt the Marine broke one. If he had killed an innocent bystander then I would say lock him up and throw away the key. But a wounded insurgent? The insurgent would have gladly killed the marine in a similar situation and got nothing but praise from his comrades. Why should we fight using one set of rules while the other guys use another? If you see your friends getting blown to pieces by the enemy, why should you refrain from killing them when you have the chance? If every soldier who did the same thing in WWII was put in prison for life there wouldn't have been any place to put the criminals. Maybe a dishonorable discharge as reasonable punishment but life in prison? Absolutely ridiculous.

Because we are the good guys. To even ask a question like that is proof that your moral compass is broken.

I've never been a soldier, thank God, but if I was one and I had seen my brothers slaughtered I don't think I would have any problems with my conscience if I killed someone who would surely kill me if he had a chance. I am not saying it's right, I'm saying it is a natural feeling to have. I can see circumstances, say in WWII, where if I captured a German soldier killing him would never even enter my mind, because he was just a victim of circumstances. But in Iraq there were no jihadists who were forced to fight (that I know of). They chose to fight and they followed no rules, except to kill as many of us as possible by any means possible. In that situation, if I had been traumatized by what I had seen and experienced, as I probably would have been, then killing the guy is what I would have done too. Maybe I don't have your moral purity but I have no problem with what he did. Should he be punished? Perhaps. But life in prison? That's ridiculous.

and I am proud that soldiers discount the deluded opinions of civilians. These people are murderers plain and simple. Courts all over the world have held that opinion. And frankly, I value the "chickenhawk" opinion of a keyboard strategist as much as I do the fluff in my belly button.

Thanks for your kind words. I realize in your eyes I have no right to an opinion because I am a "Chickenhawk." Well you can stuff your opinion where the sun don't shine. A chickenhawk is someone who sends other people to their deaths but who wouldn't fight themselves, not someone who happened to never have been in the military. My sympathies lie with our troops and not those who slaughter them. I didn't say what he did was right. I said it was understandable. I also said life in prison for executing a wounded enemy is excessive. And finally, I do not give a crap what you think either.

if the chicken suit fits.

run out of bile? Then I will let you and your smug sense of moral superiority alone. You love dishing out ad hominem attacks but finally have nothing to say. Next time, state your opinion or difference of opinion and don't get nasty. You will live longer and happier. Good bye.

Nutjobia bile and nastiness scale, you were at an j-5 (jerk 5) level and I was about a j-2 level. SO you win.

who got nasty. And, in this instance, you're much to modest. Attack me and I will hand you your head (figuratively). Now get lost loser.

attitude whilst flinging more dung. Perhaps a monkey suit instead of a chicken suit?

of your biting comments. Give it up loser. I had fun. Thanks for the entertainment.

yet I am the one with the biting comments? Gary 50. Well I have heard senility starts at 50.

starts at 50. A little advice, don't listen to the voices in your head. They have meds for that.

I will. Now can we get back to the point? You are in favor of mob rule and street executions. You imagine yourself in a firefight and only you can avenge the death of your buddy who died in your arms. So your dream induced fireflight you decide to execute every insurgent you dream about. Is that about right?

Although you have never been in any situation close to that, you have good war movies and mythological warrior code bullshit that dictates you would become a ruthless killing machine to avenge your buddies death.

You sir are a coward. A cheap hero worshipping, Rambo idolizing coward.

Now good day to you

sir are a horses ass who gets his jollies belittling others because it makes you feel like a man. You know nothing about me except the fantasies the voices in your head create. Get help. I'm sure you get away with bullying others but every once in a while you will run into someone like me who will make you look like the obnoxious moron you are. Adios, loser.

Among those orders are when an enemy combatant is injured, and no longer fighting, you are to take him into custody and render medical aid.

Those soldiers defied orders, on video. Knowingly.

Soldiers who disobey orders pay the price - as per a military court that they agreed to when they enlisted.

These are rules everybody needs to go by, in order to protect everyone. You do NOT execute a wounded combatant, you take them into custody and give them medical attention.

As a matter of fact, if an enemy pilot parachutes from a plane that has been fired on, he is assumed to be injured, and cannot be shot in mid air, nor can he be shot while retrieving him.

This clearly was not simply a case of combat, if the Marine was convicted of the execution of someone in their custody.

we have seen insurgents fake being wounded in order to kill a US soldier. And we saw US soldiers captured and beheaded by insurgents in the early days of the Iraq war. No quibbling about the Geneva Convention from them. We know they would not hesitate to kill a wounded US soldier.
My moral compass isn't broken. Nor is my sense of self preservation.

Just because someone else might break the law is no excuse to break a law.

Did you read the article? There is a recording of a soldier saying, "Anyone want to give this idiot first aid?" and people said "No."

There was no self preservation there - there was a wounded combatant who was cornered.

They were required by law to give him first aid and to take him into custody. And they executed him.

They broke the law, and paid the price.

We should also remember in this talk about American soldiers - this was a UK Marine who was convicted.

And in times gone by, it has been an incentive for opponents to surrender rather than fight to the death.

There was a time when the general attitude was "Surrender to the Americans. They're decent; they'll treat you well."

Those days are gone; maybe forever.

In a strange turn of events, September 11th turned us into terrorists. Terrorists who deny being terrorists, because "it's all right when we do it; it's just wrong if someone else does it."

Not a citizen army. That is truly a self selecting group of people who have a specific mindset.

surrendered or gave up...

what he did was murder. theres no question about that.

id expect it to be called that if it were in reverse as well.

the Japanese and Nazis treated prisoners terribly...
hence why there was another Geneva convention after WW2.

We should be going after the soldiers that murder civilians (which there a lot of unfortunately). Prosecutions like this will only serve as stories to rally the Theocons.

Makes me worry for you. A person with morals will do what is right whether the enemy does so or not.

He said it himself, right on camera.

Maybe you should lobby to have the Geneva convention overturned?

I think most of the time in the US they are released.

It just happens to be means tested now.

"Sorry son, your bank account is less than a thousandth what it needs to be to escape prosecution for war crimes."

All included activities are contingency and convenience.

The barbaric prosecuting the mad...