Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

unhappycamper

(60,364 posts)
Tue Jun 24, 2014, 10:35 AM Jun 2014

U.S. gets legal protections for commandos in Iraq

http://hamptonroads.com/2014/06/us-gets-legal-protections-commandos-iraq

U.S. gets legal protections for commandos in Iraq
By Lolita C. Baldor
The Associated Press
© June 23, 2014

WASHINGTON

The United States and Iraq have reached an agreement on legal protections for American commandos deploying into Iraq to assess and advise Iraqi forces, three years after efforts to reach a similar pact for a larger U.S. force failed.

Rear Adm. John Kirby said Monday that Iraq outlined acceptable legal assurances for the short-term mission in a diplomatic note ensuring that troops will not be subject to Iraq's judicial process. Instead, if there are any problems, troops would be adjudicated under the U.S. Uniform Code of Military Justice.

The agreement allows the deployment of several teams of special operations forces, including U.S. Army Green Berets, to conduct an initial assessment of Iraq's military and will lead to the eventual deployment of up to 300 forces who will serve as advisers.

The legal immunity protections announced Monday are similar to those provided to U.S. civilians and troops working out of the embassy, officials said.
3 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
U.S. gets legal protections for commandos in Iraq (Original Post) unhappycamper Jun 2014 OP
Good Gothmog Jun 2014 #1
Our troops deserve NOT to try Iraq, Round 3. unhappycamper Jun 2014 #2
Agreed Gothmog Jun 2014 #3

unhappycamper

(60,364 posts)
2. Our troops deserve NOT to try Iraq, Round 3.
Wed Jun 25, 2014, 06:16 AM
Jun 2014

The Brits did their round 3 in Afghanistan with the same results they gathered from the first two rounds. (I don't know if they learned anything.)

We're now talking about try number 3 in Iraq?

Gothmog

(143,654 posts)
3. Agreed
Wed Jun 25, 2014, 06:28 PM
Jun 2014

But President Obama did not leave a residual force in Iraq due to a lack of legal protections as set forth in a Status of Forces Agreement. President Obama was correct to not subject our troops to liability and prosecution without the legal protections that would have been is a SOF agreement. Now, the only way for President Obama to send any advisers into Iraq is with a SOF that protects our troop.

Without a SOF legal protection, President Obama would be opening himself up to charges that the SOFA was not important in 2011 and that he could have left a residual force in Iraq. From a purely legal standpoint, I am glad that our troops will have the required legal protection and that President Obama is approaching this mess in the best possible way given the circumstances.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Foreign Affairs»U.S. gets legal protectio...