Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ex-UK Special Forces break silence on 'war crimes' by colleagues

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 89 posts

Re: Ex-UK Special Forces break silence on 'war crimes' by colleagues

#21

Post by huhkerrf »

When I read about terrible things done in a group like this, my first thought is: would I have done the right thing?

I like to think I'm a good person, but these people probably do, too. It sounds like there's something rotten in the culture of the special forces that encouraged or at least overlooked these actions. What would I have done if I had been there? Would I have stood up against people I saw as my brothers in arms?

Before anyone gets this twisted, this is not an excuse of their behavior or saying that it should be discounted.

Re: Ex-UK Special Forces break silence on 'war crimes' by colleagues

#22

Post by SAI_Peregrinus »

FirmwareBurner wrote: post #18
axus wrote: post #10

The evidence presented by the BBC in 2020: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-53597137 And apparently Australia had already released their report and investigation of their own behavior: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-55088230 But only the whistleblower and one other were tried and convicted: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brereton_Report

>But only the whistleblower and one other were tried and convicted: Of course, what did you expect? Murder is legal if it's for the government, and, exposing your government's secret dirty laundry is a crime against the law. Business as usual everywhere. I'm not aware of any government that rewards you when you exposed it as fool/criminal in front of their voters and the world. Hence why whistleblowers get the book t…

> Another proof that the legality of right VS wrong, good VS evil, has less to do with morals and more to do with whether you're on the victorious side of history.

I'd say more that "legality" and "morals" are not necessarily related. Morality cannot be imposed by laws, and laws aren't usually driven by morality. This applies to both secular and religious laws.

Re: Ex-UK Special Forces break silence on 'war crimes' by colleagues

#23

Post by mtrovo »

harddrivereque wrote: post #14

It should be obvious to everyone, not just about UK, but all sorts of war invoke this. I mean, we all know about torture in Guantanamo and even on European soil, and it wasn't even that long ago. What makes anyone think anything has changed? Why would it change? Is there an incentive? Sure, there are courts and theoretical conventions, but the system is not perfect, there is no enforcement and also no incentive to en…

I think it's deeper than that. There's an incentive on not going against your own military because doing so would attract the wrong kind of mentality and makes things worse when you need them. So unless there are real consequences against brushing it off (like burning down public buildings) that's usually what happens. But publicly people cannot be too explicit saying it because it plays on the image of the pristine rule of law that our politicians like so much to use on speeches to make sure we're above China and other developing countries on the moral grounds.

Re: Ex-UK Special Forces break silence on 'war crimes' by colleagues

#24

Post by pessimizer »

tiahura wrote: post #20

It's hard to know what to make of an article like this because of the lack of context. Killing the kids of your enemy is bad, but was happening long before humans showed up. So, the question is, given comparable conditions, how did SAS perform vs others? Are they 1/2 as cruel as the French and 1/4 as cruel than they used to be? If so, we should be happy they're improving. We don't know. This seems like a systemic pro…

> Killing the kids of your enemy is bad, but was happening long before humans showed up.

What does this mean, and why is it relevant? Some animals eat their weaker young. Would you include this in an argument defending a child cannibal? Did he eat fewer or more children than others?

I think this is how you reason when you have no values. "I know it's probably bad or whatever, but it's 5% fewer than the French!"

"Who are the French?"

"An excuse to kill 4% more kids. If we need to kill even more kids, I'll find another country that at some point in the past could justify a few more basis points."

"You know, some invaders in the past killed all the kids as a matter of policy. Who are we to say they weren't great or moral? It's culturally insensitive."

"Lets consult Heinlein. I know he has a lot about sleeping with your children, but he's got to have something about killing them."

Re: Ex-UK Special Forces break silence on 'war crimes' by colleagues

#25

Post by psunavy03 »

harddrivereque wrote: post #14

It should be obvious to everyone, not just about UK, but all sorts of war invoke this. I mean, we all know about torture in Guantanamo and even on European soil, and it wasn't even that long ago. What makes anyone think anything has changed? Why would it change? Is there an incentive? Sure, there are courts and theoretical conventions, but the system is not perfect, there is no enforcement and also no incentive to en…

War crimes have always happened. What matters is whether they are celebrated, ignored, or properly investigated and punished.

Wars are horrible enough as-is; we have laws of armed conflict to try the best we can to keep a lid on the utter barbarity of it all, and to help our warfighters be able to live with themselves after.

This is not a new concept; one of the first people to expound on the proper laws of war in the West was Saint Augustine, and his work is still the philosophical foundation of the subject.

Re: Ex-UK Special Forces break silence on 'war crimes' by colleagues

#27

Post by lwo32k »

FirmwareBurner wrote: post #18
axus wrote: post #10

The evidence presented by the BBC in 2020: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-53597137 And apparently Australia had already released their report and investigation of their own behavior: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-55088230 But only the whistleblower and one other were tried and convicted: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brereton_Report

>But only the whistleblower and one other were tried and convicted: Of course, what did you expect? Murder is legal if it's for the government, and, exposing your government's secret dirty laundry is a crime against the law. Business as usual everywhere. I'm not aware of any government that rewards you when you exposed it as fool/criminal in front of their voters and the world. Hence why whistleblowers get the book t…

Making a dent is possible, but to take on power you need other powerful people/networks backing you. Most whistleblowers don't do enough homework. They just want to dump things out there and hope for the best. That's never good enough.

Re: Ex-UK Special Forces break silence on 'war crimes' by colleagues

#28

Post by FirmwareBurner »

lwo32k wrote: post #27
FirmwareBurner wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>But only the whistleblower and one other were tried and convicted: Of course, what did you expect? Murder is legal if it's for the government, and, exposing your government's secret dirty laundry is a crime against the law. Business as usual everywhere. I'm not aware of any government that rewards you when you exposed it as fool/criminal in front of their voters and the world. Hence why whistleblowers get the book t…

Making a dent is possible, but to take on power you need other powerful people/networks backing you. Most whistleblowers don't do enough homework. They just want to dump things out there and hope for the best. That's never good enough.

> but to take on power you need other powerful people/networks backing you. Most whistleblowers don't do enough homework.

Doing your homework and having powerful people behind you are orthogonal. You can do all the homework you want but powerful people got in power and staid in power for playing for those in power, they're not gonna throw away all that to die on your hill with you.

You might think you can get away by playing one political side against the other for your protection and rally support, but when it comes to national security, military industrial complex, the ultra wealthy elites, etc, those tend to be part of and fund both sides so it won't work out in your favor as you might expect.

>They just want to dump things out there and hope for the best.

What's the alternative? Once you start "doing your homework" those in power will already find out you're rocking the boat and will lock you up under the usual $ESPIONAGE, $TERRORISM, $PATRIOT laws before you manage to send a text, so your safest bet is to release all info quickly to the public/press while you're still able to.

Time works against you here. The longer you're in possession of dirt that can get those at the top in trouble, the more you risk finding yourself "Epsteined".

Re: Ex-UK Special Forces break silence on 'war crimes' by colleagues

#29

Post by exe34 »

huhkerrf wrote: post #21

When I read about terrible things done in a group like this, my first thought is: would I have done the right thing? I like to think I'm a good person, but these people probably do, too. It sounds like there's something rotten in the culture of the special forces that encouraged or at least overlooked these actions. What would I have done if I had been there? Would I have stood up against people I saw as my brothers…

> something rotten in the culture of the special forces that encouraged or at least overlooked these actions

I suspect it's the price of having the best killers on Earth. They necessarily have to compromise on something else.

Re: Ex-UK Special Forces break silence on 'war crimes' by colleagues

#30

Post by fmajid »

psunavy03 wrote: post #25
harddrivereque wrote: post #14

It should be obvious to everyone, not just about UK, but all sorts of war invoke this. I mean, we all know about torture in Guantanamo and even on European soil, and it wasn't even that long ago. What makes anyone think anything has changed? Why would it change? Is there an incentive? Sure, there are courts and theoretical conventions, but the system is not perfect, there is no enforcement and also no incentive to en…

War crimes have always happened. What matters is whether they are celebrated, ignored, or properly investigated and punished. Wars are horrible enough as-is; we have laws of armed conflict to try the best we can to keep a lid on the utter barbarity of it all, and to help our warfighters be able to live with themselves after. This is not a new concept; one of the first people to expound on the proper laws of war in th…

That's too easy. The US, British and Israelis routinely whitewash their war crimes. The Russians don't even pretend to follow the rules of war.

In comparison, the French put a general in the dock when his soldiers in the Ivory Coast, at his implicit orders, extrajudicially killed Firmin Mahé, a bandit himself responsible for many murders, and I believe other European countries have done similar prosecutions of senior officers.

Impunity is a choice.

Post reply on HN